Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Ian Burrell wrote:
> Windows Explorer isn't a window manager.
Actually it is. When you install those small applications that change
the look and feel of Windows, all they do is, for WinNT/2k/XP, change
the key
{HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE|HKEY_CURRENT_USER}\Software\Microsoft\Windows
NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon, key "Shell", which point to "explorer.exe"
by default. For Win95/98/Me, it's System.ini, key "shell", which also
point to "explorer.exe".
(from the documentation of LiteStep at
http://lsdocs.shellfront.org/install.php)
Explorer.exe is a big, BIG thing that does lots of things (too many?).
Jehan
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas Wourms wrote: > > That's true, *sigh*, I know what you mean. Tho I can't quite understand > what this driving desire for a rootless X server is all about? To my > death, I'll never understand why people like the explorer window manager > over the X alternatives. I mean c'mon people, Windows Explorer as a > window manager sucks. Why would you want it to manage your X > applications? I don't know about most people, but I like the current way > X works, in fact I like the full screen even better. In fact I wish there > was a way to do the opposite of running X in rootless mode. If there were > only a way to get windows binaries to pop up inside X, then I could just > ditch this crummy explorer windows manager and use X full time. In fact, > on Darwin, I hate the window manager for Aqua. I'd much prefer to run > kde3 any day then to run that OpenSTEP look-alike. > Windows Explorer isn't a window manager. Windows Explorer is the file manager. It also runs the taskbar, start menu, and desktop. All the movement of windows is handled by the operating systemr. In X, the window managers mainly handle the frames and moving the windows. Various ones do menus, taskbars, desktops, but many leave those to other processes. BTW, it should be possible to run an external window manager in rootless mode. There are two ways to do rootless mode. One is to have an internal window manager in the X server so that Windows handles the movement and sends events to the X server. The second way has an external window manager. In both cases, each top-level X window is mapped to a Windows window instead of one big window like now. In external mode, the windows are bordless since the external window manager draws the frame and converts mouse events into movement. The external mode probably is easier to write only the wrapping code is needed. - Ian -- Ian Burrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.znark.com/
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Jehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas Wourms wrote: > > So? Your point? I don't want to run linux on this machine. My > question > > above was partially a joke and partially a rhetorical one. I don't > need > > to be lectured on the joy and simplicity of the explorer interface > (tho > > neither seem to apply). Let's not turn this into a Microsoft > lovefest. > > My point was that Rootless mode is a fluff setting, something that > really > > isn't that important. Perhaps a better use of time could be spent > > figuring out how to profile and improve the performance of the X > server? > > Or perhaps making truetype fonts easier for people to use in X? > > My point is that it's not cygwin's goal to replace Windows. Cygwin wants > > to bring Unix applications to Windows, not Windows application to Unix. > If you want Windows applications inside XFree, Linux+Wine do exactly > that. Again, you are taking things too seriously, I was merely stating the point that the converse would be much more interesting. I'm not suggesting everyone should drop everything and do it. > My point is that Windows doesn't "suck" as much as you claim. We are all > > using it on this mailing list. Some may not like it but I doubt that the > > majority here think so. To put it in the words of David Korn "it is a very poorly written OS". Enough said. > My point is that maybe you don't see a use to the Rootless mode but > seeing the number of requests about it here and on slashdot, that's not > what most people think. I saw just as many complaints regarding the speed. > My point is I don't like the way you are telling us what to do base on > your own opinion while we are all volunteers using our own free time to > improve Cygwin/XFree. Oh can it, I'm not telling anyone what to do. I was making a suggestion. Besides, you have your opinions I have mine. > By the way, any patch you could submit is welcome. Likewise, any package you submit is most welcome. Cheers, Nicholas __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Charles Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > Nicholas Wourms wrote: > > > > So? Your point? I don't want to run linux on this machine. My question > > above was partially a joke and partially a rhetorical one. I don't need > > to be lectured on the joy and simplicity of the explorer interface (tho > > neither seem to apply). Let's not turn this into a Microsoft lovefest. > > My point was that Rootless mode is a fluff setting, something that really > > isn't that important. Perhaps a better use of time could be spent > > figuring out how to profile and improve the performance of the X server? > > Or perhaps making truetype fonts easier for people to use in X? > > > Nicholas -- >There are lots of worthy areas why Xserv on cygwin can be improved. > You have your priorities, other people have theirs. Unfortunately, you > ARE in the extreme minority, so you're going to have to sit back and > watch rootless be discussed an implemented. Probably before TT or > profiling or ... > > Why? > > Go read the Slashdot thread from Sunday, 7 July 2002. Almost every > third message was "It's pretty good, but it doesn't have a rootless > mode. All commercial Xservs on windows have one; this won't be a > [serious|real|usable|finished] product until it does, too." > > There was even one message that basically said "This thing sucks ***. It > doesn't have a rootless mode". Okay, so the guy was a troll, but nobody > contradicted him... > > We even got two or three spill-over questions which were obviously > stimulated by the Slashdot story, where folks we'd never heard of wrote > to the mailing list to say "Cygwin Xserver is really cool, but I > [won't|can't] use it until it has a rootless mode. When will that be?" > > Finally, and most importantly, Harold *wants* to work on a rootless > mode. He's scratching his own itch. If you want to work on TT support, > nobody is stopping you. -- go scratch. > > --Chuck > Chuck, Thanks for writing that response. That was exactly what I was going to say: someone complains about the lack of a rootless mode at least once a week, but no one ever complains about truetype fonts or profiling the server. I think that the performance question that got turned into a profiling question is really due to the way that we draw graphics, which we are working on fixing with the Native GDI engine. In any case, rootless mode is a top priority. Harold
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas Wourms wrote: > So? Your point? I don't want to run linux on this machine. My question > above was partially a joke and partially a rhetorical one. I don't need > to be lectured on the joy and simplicity of the explorer interface (tho > neither seem to apply). Let's not turn this into a Microsoft lovefest. > My point was that Rootless mode is a fluff setting, something that really > isn't that important. Perhaps a better use of time could be spent > figuring out how to profile and improve the performance of the X server? > Or perhaps making truetype fonts easier for people to use in X? My point is that it's not cygwin's goal to replace Windows. Cygwin wants to bring Unix applications to Windows, not Windows application to Unix. If you want Windows applications inside XFree, Linux+Wine do exactly that. My point is that Windows doesn't "suck" as much as you claim. We are all using it on this mailing list. Some may not like it but I doubt that the majority here think so. My point is that maybe you don't see a use to the Rootless mode but seeing the number of requests about it here and on slashdot, that's not what most people think. My point is I don't like the way you are telling us what to do base on your own opinion while we are all volunteers using our own free time to improve Cygwin/XFree. By the way, any patch you could submit is welcome. Jehan
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas Wourms wrote: > So? Your point? I don't want to run linux on this machine. My question > above was partially a joke and partially a rhetorical one. I don't need > to be lectured on the joy and simplicity of the explorer interface (tho > neither seem to apply). Let's not turn this into a Microsoft lovefest. > My point was that Rootless mode is a fluff setting, something that really > isn't that important. Perhaps a better use of time could be spent > figuring out how to profile and improve the performance of the X server? > Or perhaps making truetype fonts easier for people to use in X? Nicholas -- There are lots of worthy areas why Xserv on cygwin can be improved. You have your priorities, other people have theirs. Unfortunately, you ARE in the extreme minority, so you're going to have to sit back and watch rootless be discussed an implemented. Probably before TT or profiling or ... Why? Go read the Slashdot thread from Sunday, 7 July 2002. Almost every third message was "It's pretty good, but it doesn't have a rootless mode. All commercial Xservs on windows have one; this won't be a [serious|real|usable|finished] product until it does, too." There was even one message that basically said "This thing sucks ***. It doesn't have a rootless mode". Okay, so the guy was a troll, but nobody contradicted him... We even got two or three spill-over questions which were obviously stimulated by the Slashdot story, where folks we'd never heard of wrote to the mailing list to say "Cygwin Xserver is really cool, but I [won't|can't] use it until it has a rootless mode. When will that be?" Finally, and most importantly, Harold *wants* to work on a rootless mode. He's scratching his own itch. If you want to work on TT support, nobody is stopping you. -- go scratch. --Chuck
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Jehan wrote: > Nicholas Wourms wrote: > Tho I can't quite understand > > what this driving desire for a rootless X server is all about? To my > > death, I'll never understand why people like the explorer window manager > > over the X alternatives. I mean c'mon people, Windows Explorer as a > > window manager sucks. Why would you want it to manage your X > > applications? Full ACK. > Now, having an alternative would be nice, that's for sure. As my boss is > fond of saying: "two is better than one". If you want to remove Windows > Explorer, go check Shellfront (http://shellfront.org/). But you will > never see Notepad running in an X window. Cygwin works *on top of* > Windows, not the other way around. Cygwin *add* a unix layer to Windows, > it doesn't *replace* Windows. If you really want that, if you really > want your All-X desktop, go install Linux and run your Windows > applications using Wine. You just pointed me to a long forgotten thing. Wine has a display driver, which exports all GDI calls to X11. Maybe some freak will port it to windows and I can use Windowsapplications remote :) bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Nicholas Wourms wrote: > Like when X11 finally reaches X12? Or even R7? I don't expect that ever will come a X12. Changes in the major release just mean a incompatible change in the protocol. And the growing list of extensions seem to show that the current design will last for some other years. bye ago -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gotti.org ICQ: 126018723
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Jehan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas Wourms wrote: > Tho I can't quite understand > > what this driving desire for a rootless X server is all about? To my > > death, I'll never understand why people like the explorer window > manager > > over the X alternatives. I mean c'mon people, Windows Explorer as a > > window manager sucks. Why would you want it to manage your X > > applications? > > Maybe *you* prefer KDE, OpenStep, whatever over Windows but that doesn't > > mean *everybody* does. As a window manager, Windows does perfectly well > for me: I can move my windows around, I can resize them, minimize them > and even maximize them. I like the taskbar (and everybody does since now > > every desktop system has it), I like the systray, I like the quicklaunch > > bar and the Start menu is as much a mess in Windows than in KDE. > > Now, having an alternative would be nice, that's for sure. As my boss is > > fond of saying: "two is better than one". If you want to remove Windows > Explorer, go check Shellfront (http://shellfront.org/). But you will > never see Notepad running in an X window. Cygwin works *on top of* > Windows, not the other way around. Cygwin *add* a unix layer to Windows, > > it doesn't *replace* Windows. If you really want that, if you really > want your All-X desktop, go install Linux and run your Windows > applications using Wine. > > > > I don't know about most people, but I like the current way > > X works, in fact I like the full screen even better. > > Why do you think windowing systems took over most software applications? > > I like being able to see the content of two applications at the same > time. Like for instance when I follow a tutorial on a web browser on how > > to create a map for Quake. Or when I want to use a complex funtion in my > > program, I want to be able to see MSDN at the same time I use my code. > Now, if I use vi/emacs/whatever in X, I can't see any of those > broswer/msdn windows at the same time if the application if fullscreen. > What's worse, if the browser/msdn is the active application and I want > to activate a X application, I first have to click on the X button in > the taskbar to activate XWin, then I have to activate the X application > itself. If I can see each X application with its own button in my > taskbar, and when I click on it I have this X app showing *next to* > instead of *on top of* my Visual Studio window, I would be far more > happy. > > > > In fact I wish there > > was a way to do the opposite of running X in rootless mode. If there > were > > only a way to get windows binaries to pop up inside X, then I could > just > > ditch this crummy explorer windows manager and use X full time. > > See my comment above about Linux and Wine. So? Your point? I don't want to run linux on this machine. My question above was partially a joke and partially a rhetorical one. I don't need to be lectured on the joy and simplicity of the explorer interface (tho neither seem to apply). Let's not turn this into a Microsoft lovefest. My point was that Rootless mode is a fluff setting, something that really isn't that important. Perhaps a better use of time could be spent figuring out how to profile and improve the performance of the X server? Or perhaps making truetype fonts easier for people to use in X? __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
> > >I don't know about imlib but glib-1.2.10 and gtk+-1.2.10 compile OOTB. >I built them to create a gvim locally. There was just one problem in >glib/gstrfuncs.c. There's an extern declaration for strsignal() which >collides with a Cygwin header. Just add a #ifndef __CYGWIN__ to the >extern declaration and you're done. > > I just discovered that Steven's patches actually permitted to create DLLs also, fixed that small problem and some other small bugs too. -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
> > >You read my message correctly the first time. I do not have enough time to >work on glib and gtk+. You are more than welcome to work on them. I think >that Nicholas might want to work with you on them. > I wasn't wrong afterall =) (I didn't read the reply until after sending my reply) >>> Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is >>>assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for this >>>responsibility? >>> >I would actually have the same problem with not having enough knowledge. I am >sort of an interesting person though... I tend to gater, filter, and absorb >information/knowledge faster than most people, and I tend to do something >productive with that info quite quickly. That is not to say, however, that I >have 10 to 20 hours to mess around with glib and gtk+. :) > Well, given enough time I can digest knowledge quite good, but it happens that I'm trying to get a university degree (I never understood english degree names very well, but it is that kind of degree that you take from a university you enter at the age of 19 and you exit a teorical minimum of 5 years later) and many other things... so time is just the scarce resource. But if it does compile OOTB like Corinna says and if no one expects me to release gtk+2 tomorrow... I could well commit to mantainership. Of course anyone with more time / knowledge / will could take my place as it wants 0=) >I love watching big projects and I love seeing them pass milestones. > Yeah, I just love it. But even if they're way too big fishes for me, I can't just sit in a corner a watch (this leads to my many filled bugs in bugzilla.mozilla.org, my mantainership of rsync and other cygwin packages, my small contributions to freebsd ports, and the such). =) >off-topic... nothing to see here. Move along. Move along. > Not true, cygwin is pretty big and pretty good ;-) (yeah, still waiting for someone to do "80 hours of work" for the rootless XFree =P) Lapo -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas Wourms wrote: Tho I can't quite understand > what this driving desire for a rootless X server is all about? To my > death, I'll never understand why people like the explorer window manager > over the X alternatives. I mean c'mon people, Windows Explorer as a > window manager sucks. Why would you want it to manage your X > applications? Maybe *you* prefer KDE, OpenStep, whatever over Windows but that doesn't mean *everybody* does. As a window manager, Windows does perfectly well for me: I can move my windows around, I can resize them, minimize them and even maximize them. I like the taskbar (and everybody does since now every desktop system has it), I like the systray, I like the quicklaunch bar and the Start menu is as much a mess in Windows than in KDE. Now, having an alternative would be nice, that's for sure. As my boss is fond of saying: "two is better than one". If you want to remove Windows Explorer, go check Shellfront (http://shellfront.org/). But you will never see Notepad running in an X window. Cygwin works *on top of* Windows, not the other way around. Cygwin *add* a unix layer to Windows, it doesn't *replace* Windows. If you really want that, if you really want your All-X desktop, go install Linux and run your Windows applications using Wine. > I don't know about most people, but I like the current way > X works, in fact I like the full screen even better. Why do you think windowing systems took over most software applications? I like being able to see the content of two applications at the same time. Like for instance when I follow a tutorial on a web browser on how to create a map for Quake. Or when I want to use a complex funtion in my program, I want to be able to see MSDN at the same time I use my code. Now, if I use vi/emacs/whatever in X, I can't see any of those broswer/msdn windows at the same time if the application if fullscreen. What's worse, if the browser/msdn is the active application and I want to activate a X application, I first have to click on the X button in the taskbar to activate XWin, then I have to activate the X application itself. If I can see each X application with its own button in my taskbar, and when I click on it I have this X app showing *next to* instead of *on top of* my Visual Studio window, I would be far more happy. > In fact I wish there > was a way to do the opposite of running X in rootless mode. If there were > only a way to get windows binaries to pop up inside X, then I could just > ditch this crummy explorer windows manager and use X full time. See my comment above about Linux and Wine. Jehan
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas Wourms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > > --- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Nicholas, > > > > > > > He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release > these > > > > packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying > mechanics > > > of > > > > how X works. Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it > is > > > > assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready > for > > > this > > > > responsibility? > > > > > > It is not going to happen. I simply do not have time to work on > > > packages > > > other than Cygwin/XFree86 proper. Sure, I have released a few extra > > > packages, > > > but that was just to get the ball rolling on XFree86 category > packages. > > > For > > > future reference: I do not intend to assume maintainership of any > new > > > packages. However, I reserve the right to post an initial version > of > > > packages > > > that compile out of the box, just to get things started. > > > > > > I hope that clears things up, > > > > Harold, > > > > I'm sorry, I never meant to unload additional work onto you. In > previous > > messages regarding berkley db, you mentioned that you were going to > stick > > to X packages, so I assumed you meant the packages you were already > > working on for X. Apparently this is not the case, which is OK. I'm > glad > > you cleared things up for everyone. > > > > Cheers, > > I will admit that I gave some mixed signals. I thought I was going to > have a > lot more free time, which I do. But I also thought that XFree86 itself > would > not take anymore time than it already did. However, there has been no > shortage of things to do for XFree86. After we get the scrollbars patch > landed and the cross compilation fixes merged I really do plan on > working on a > rootless server. That's true, *sigh*, I know what you mean. Tho I can't quite understand what this driving desire for a rootless X server is all about? To my death, I'll never understand why people like the explorer window manager over the X alternatives. I mean c'mon people, Windows Explorer as a window manager sucks. Why would you want it to manage your X applications? I don't know about most people, but I like the current way X works, in fact I like the full screen even better. In fact I wish there was a way to do the opposite of running X in rootless mode. If there were only a way to get windows binaries to pop up inside X, then I could just ditch this crummy explorer windows manager and use X full time. In fact, on Darwin, I hate the window manager for Aqua. I'd much prefer to run kde3 any day then to run that OpenSTEP look-alike. > You may have seen some place-holding files creep into > the > patches lately. That is because I have been studying the XonX code to > how it > does things. If you ever want to look at sloppy, convuluted, > uncommented > code, just have a look at xc/programs/Xserver/hw/darwin. Yikes. That > code > can really give you a headache. Hmm, this coming from bsd nuts who cannot even get the name of Charles Darwin's famous assistant right (Hexley != Huxley)? Does this really suprise you? Cheers, Nicholas __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas Wourms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > --- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nicholas, > > > > > He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these > > > packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics > > of > > > how X works. Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is > > > assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for > > this > > > responsibility? > > > > It is not going to happen. I simply do not have time to work on > > packages > > other than Cygwin/XFree86 proper. Sure, I have released a few extra > > packages, > > but that was just to get the ball rolling on XFree86 category packages. > > For > > future reference: I do not intend to assume maintainership of any new > > packages. However, I reserve the right to post an initial version of > > packages > > that compile out of the box, just to get things started. > > > > I hope that clears things up, > > Harold, > > I'm sorry, I never meant to unload additional work onto you. In previous > messages regarding berkley db, you mentioned that you were going to stick > to X packages, so I assumed you meant the packages you were already > working on for X. Apparently this is not the case, which is OK. I'm glad > you cleared things up for everyone. > > Cheers, I will admit that I gave some mixed signals. I thought I was going to have a lot more free time, which I do. But I also thought that XFree86 itself would not take anymore time than it already did. However, there has been no shortage of things to do for XFree86. After we get the scrollbars patch landed and the cross compilation fixes merged I really do plan on working on a rootless server. You may have seen some place-holding files creep into the patches lately. That is because I have been studying the XonX code to how it does things. If you ever want to look at sloppy, convuluted, uncommented code, just have a look at xc/programs/Xserver/hw/darwin. Yikes. That code can really give you a headache. Harold
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know precisely what you mean. I even go a little further than that in > that > I have a list of projects that I can't wait for other people to finish. > Recently, some of those projects were: Mozilla 1.0 (yay!), > OpenOffice.org 1.0 > (yippee!), The Big Dig (www.bigdig.com), the International Space Station > (or > whatever the current space shuttle mission is), the parking garage > across the > street, etc. :) I love watching big projects and I love seeing them > pass > milestones. Hmm, Like when X11 finally reaches X12? Or even R7? Cheers, Nicholas __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > > > >He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these > >packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics of > >how X works. > > > That is indeed the best choice, maybe I read his message in a way too > non-optimistic view =) > You read my message correctly the first time. I do not have enough time to work on glib and gtk+. You are more than welcome to work on them. I think that Nicholas might want to work with you on them. > > Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is > >assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for this > >responsibility? > > > It's not a question of responsability, but of lack of knowledge and lack > of time to obtain that knowledge ^_^ > But again, I don't have idea of how much hard would it be... I just seen > the 20k patch to gtk+-1.2.10 by Steven and Corinna says that right now > it compiles OOTB. > OOTB is fairly different from "20k patch needed" IMHO, bay shortly after > I received a message from Steven stating that his port is fairly old and > many things changed (porting of autotools being the biggest, I bet)... > I would actually have the same problem with not having enough knowledge. I am sort of an interesting person though... I tend to gater, filter, and absorb information/knowledge faster than most people, and I tend to do something productive with that info quite quickly. That is not to say, however, that I have 10 to 20 hours to mess around with glib and gtk+. :) > >As for freeciv, I will send you a static lib of Xaw3d to see if that will > >help you better. I would then release free-civ as is. > > > >We can worry about why the DLL version of Xaw3d isn't working later. > > > OK. > > > Again, is there any rush to getting it out? > > > No, just the fact that when I begin something I like to finish it soon > so that it doesn't occupy space in my head (don't know how to express it > in english but an "unfinished task" lingers in my head until it is "put > at rest" by solving it). > But again, also given the beauty of win32 native port (well, not that > native, it uses gtk+), the is no rush in it. > I know precisely what you mean. I even go a little further than that in that I have a list of projects that I can't wait for other people to finish. Recently, some of those projects were: Mozilla 1.0 (yay!), OpenOffice.org 1.0 (yippee!), The Big Dig (www.bigdig.com), the International Space Station (or whatever the current space shuttle mission is), the parking garage across the street, etc. :) I love watching big projects and I love seeing them pass milestones. I guess I am just a freak for big projects... :) Hey, this is off-topic... nothing to see here. Move along. Move along. Harold
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nicholas, > > > He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these > > packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics > of > > how X works. Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is > > assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for > this > > responsibility? > > It is not going to happen. I simply do not have time to work on > packages > other than Cygwin/XFree86 proper. Sure, I have released a few extra > packages, > but that was just to get the ball rolling on XFree86 category packages. > For > future reference: I do not intend to assume maintainership of any new > packages. However, I reserve the right to post an initial version of > packages > that compile out of the box, just to get things started. > > I hope that clears things up, Harold, I'm sorry, I never meant to unload additional work onto you. In previous messages regarding berkley db, you mentioned that you were going to stick to X packages, so I assumed you meant the packages you were already working on for X. Apparently this is not the case, which is OK. I'm glad you cleared things up for everyone. Cheers, __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
> > >He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these >packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics of >how X works. > That is indeed the best choice, maybe I read his message in a way too non-optimistic view =) > Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is >assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for this >responsibility? > It's not a question of responsability, but of lack of knowledge and lack of time to obtain that knowledge ^_^ But again, I don't have idea of how much hard would it be... I just seen the 20k patch to gtk+-1.2.10 by Steven and Corinna says that right now it compiles OOTB. OOTB is fairly different from "20k patch needed" IMHO, bay shortly after I received a message from Steven stating that his port is fairly old and many things changed (porting of autotools being the biggest, I bet)... >As for freeciv, I will send you a static lib of Xaw3d to see if that will >help you better. I would then release free-civ as is. > >We can worry about why the DLL version of Xaw3d isn't working later. > OK. > Again, is there any rush to getting it out? > No, just the fact that when I begin something I like to finish it soon so that it doesn't occupy space in my head (don't know how to express it in english but an "unfinished task" lingers in my head until it is "put at rest" by solving it). But again, also given the beauty of win32 native port (well, not that native, it uses gtk+), the is no rush in it. -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Harold, They do not. For some reason, when the dll is built, many symbols are not being exported, even with --export-all-symbols, which causes glib-genmarshal.exe to not compile due to undefined symbols. I'm going to give another shot with the new libtool to see if it is any better (supposedly it is) so we'll see... Cheers, Nicholas --- Harold L Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think that the real problem here, as always, was that gtk+ and glib > would > only build static libraries. I have heard that the 2.0 versions of this > libs > are able to build shared libraries on Cygwin, but I have not looked into > this > myself. > > Harold > > Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 12:04:54PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote: > > > Being interested in porting freeciv with gtk+ support... and gtk+ > > > package being not available... I'm investigating it =) > > > > > > Harold states he has not enough time for it ( > > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-06/msg00302.html ). > > > But has he a partial work or nothing? > > > > > > Steven has a fairly complete Gnome port on his page ( > > > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/ ), which has nothing to > do > > > with Harold's work. > > > It contains patches for many Gnome programs, including glib-1.2.10, > > > gtk+-1.2.10 and imlib-1.9.14. > > > > I don't know about imlib but glib-1.2.10 and gtk+-1.2.10 compile OOTB. > > > I built them to create a gvim locally. There was just one problem in > > glib/gstrfuncs.c. There's an extern declaration for strsignal() which > > collides with a Cygwin header. Just add a #ifndef __CYGWIN__ to the > > extern declaration and you're done. > > > > Corinna > > > > -- > > Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin > to > > Cygwin Developer > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Red Hat, Inc. > > > > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Nicholas, > He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these > packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics of > how X works. Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is > assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for this > responsibility? It is not going to happen. I simply do not have time to work on packages other than Cygwin/XFree86 proper. Sure, I have released a few extra packages, but that was just to get the ball rolling on XFree86 category packages. For future reference: I do not intend to assume maintainership of any new packages. However, I reserve the right to post an initial version of packages that compile out of the box, just to get things started. I hope that clears things up, Harold
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
I think that the real problem here, as always, was that gtk+ and glib would only build static libraries. I have heard that the 2.0 versions of this libs are able to build shared libraries on Cygwin, but I have not looked into this myself. Harold Corinna Vinschen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 12:04:54PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote: > > Being interested in porting freeciv with gtk+ support... and gtk+ > > package being not available... I'm investigating it =) > > > > Harold states he has not enough time for it ( > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-06/msg00302.html ). > > But has he a partial work or nothing? > > > > Steven has a fairly complete Gnome port on his page ( > > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/ ), which has nothing to do > > with Harold's work. > > It contains patches for many Gnome programs, including glib-1.2.10, > > gtk+-1.2.10 and imlib-1.9.14. > > I don't know about imlib but glib-1.2.10 and gtk+-1.2.10 compile OOTB. > I built them to create a gvim locally. There was just one problem in > glib/gstrfuncs.c. There's an extern declaration for strsignal() which > collides with a Cygwin header. Just add a #ifndef __CYGWIN__ to the > extern declaration and you're done. > > Corinna > > -- > Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to > Cygwin Developermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Red Hat, Inc. >
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
--- Lapo Luchini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Being interested in porting freeciv with gtk+ support... and gtk+ > package being not available... I'm investigating it =) > > Harold states he has not enough time for it ( > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-06/msg00302.html ). > But has he a partial work or nothing? He has something. Frankly, I think we should let harold release these packages. He's got a firm understanding of the underlying mechanics of how X works. Plus if you commit to maintainership of 1.X, then it is assumed that you will be working on porting 2.X. Are you ready for this responsibility? > Steven has a fairly complete Gnome port on his page ( > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/ ), which has nothing to do > with Harold's work. > It contains patches for many Gnome programs, including glib-1.2.10, > gtk+-1.2.10 and imlib-1.9.14. > > I was thinking about packaging them as requirements for the freeciv > port... has anyone done some work / has more infos / has something to > say about? > As for freeciv, I will send you a static lib of Xaw3d to see if that will help you better. I would then release free-civ as is. We can worry about why the DLL version of Xaw3d isn't working later. Again, is there any rush to getting it out? Cheers, Nicholas __ Do You Yahoo!? Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: [packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 12:04:54PM +0200, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Being interested in porting freeciv with gtk+ support... and gtk+ > package being not available... I'm investigating it =) > > Harold states he has not enough time for it ( > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-06/msg00302.html ). > But has he a partial work or nothing? > > Steven has a fairly complete Gnome port on his page ( > http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/ ), which has nothing to do > with Harold's work. > It contains patches for many Gnome programs, including glib-1.2.10, > gtk+-1.2.10 and imlib-1.9.14. I don't know about imlib but glib-1.2.10 and gtk+-1.2.10 compile OOTB. I built them to create a gvim locally. There was just one problem in glib/gstrfuncs.c. There's an extern declaration for strsignal() which collides with a Cygwin header. Just add a #ifndef __CYGWIN__ to the extern declaration and you're done. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.
[packages] gtk+, glib, imlib
Being interested in porting freeciv with gtk+ support... and gtk+ package being not available... I'm investigating it =) Harold states he has not enough time for it ( http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2002-06/msg00302.html ). But has he a partial work or nothing? Steven has a fairly complete Gnome port on his page ( http://homepage.ntlworld.com/steven.obrien2/ ), which has nothing to do with Harold's work. It contains patches for many Gnome programs, including glib-1.2.10, gtk+-1.2.10 and imlib-1.9.14. I was thinking about packaging them as requirements for the freeciv port... has anyone done some work / has more infos / has something to say about? Please note that I know *VERY* little (maybe 'nothing' is more closer to the truth) about X programming and, at least at first, I wouldn't surely be a "good" package mantainer for those packages (in fact if Steven hadn't already done all the porting work I couln't do it). -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED] (PGP & X.509 keys available) http://www.lapo.it (ICQ UIN: 529796)
