Re: [Fink-devel] gtkhtml

2003-02-17 Thread jfm
On Monday, Feb 17, 2003, at 03:10 Europe/Brussels, Max Horn wrote: So could somebody else send me a list of the files contained in the packages Done. JF Mertens --- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http:

Re: [Fink-devel] gtkhtml vs. gtkhtml1.1

2003-01-30 Thread David R. Morrison
Max Horn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 17:52 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: > >On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 17:46, Max Horn wrote: > >> At 17:12 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: > >> >A future issue for concern (after libpng vs. libpng3) is gtkhtml vs. > >> >gtkhtml1.1 .

Re: [Fink-devel] gtkhtml vs. gtkhtml1.1

2003-01-29 Thread Max Horn
At 17:52 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 17:46, Max Horn wrote: At 17:12 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: >A future issue for concern (after libpng vs. libpng3) is gtkhtml vs. >gtkhtml1.1 . A lot of the users have GNOME, and gnome-core-shlibs

Re: [Fink-devel] gtkhtml vs. gtkhtml1.1

2003-01-29 Thread Alexander Hansen
On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 17:46, Max Horn wrote: > At 17:12 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: > >A future issue for concern (after libpng vs. libpng3) is gtkhtml vs. > >gtkhtml1.1 . A lot of the users have GNOME, and gnome-core-shlibs > >depends on gtkhtml, as does gnucash (the two example

Re: [Fink-devel] gtkhtml vs. gtkhtml1.1

2003-01-29 Thread Max Horn
At 17:12 Uhr -0500 29.01.2003, Alexander Hansen wrote: A future issue for concern (after libpng vs. libpng3) is gtkhtml vs. gtkhtml1.1 . A lot of the users have GNOME, and gnome-core-shlibs depends on gtkhtml, as does gnucash (the two examples I actually have installed). However, evolution-1.2 d