On a further note, it would be desirable if a build mixed of gtk+2 and
gtk+3 would not even succeed in compilation (I know, gtk-devel.. I might
actually investigate into that further).

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Murray Cumming <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 00:50 +0300, ahmet öztürk wrote:
> > Kjell, thank you very much for the explanations.
> >
> > Actually, in vanilla tarball gtkspell-3.0 is used. When I try to compile
> > it in Ubuntu oneiric (11.10), it fails complaining that gtkspell-3.0
> > could not be found
> > (
> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/110202120/buildlog_ubuntu-oneiric-amd64.lifeograph_0.9.0-1~ppa4~oneiric_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz).
>  That's why I tried my luck with with gtkspell-2.0. (Although there is a
> package with an uncanny name in the repos (
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/oneiric/libgtkspell3-0 ), obviously it cannot
> be used by saying "pkg-config gtkspell-3.0".)
> >
> > OTOH, I tried to mix gtkmm-3.4 with gtkspell-2.0 and strangely enough
> > managed to build a binary without getting any warning although the
> > resulting binary could not be executed for the very reason you
> > mentioned. This level of "success" with gtkmm-3.4 makes me doubt that
> > gtkspell-2.0 is the cause behind RGBA errors.
>
> Well, you cannot mix GTK+ 2 and GTK+ 3, so there's little point in
> investigating further until you've fixed that.
>
> --
> Murray Cumming
> [email protected]
> www.murrayc.com
> www.openismus.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtkmm-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
>



-- 
Everything is Original.
_______________________________________________
gtkmm-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list

Reply via email to