Re: [Gimp-developer] gimp-help-2 status and suggestions

2003-11-16 Thread Daniel Egger
Am Son, den 16.11.2003 schrieb Roman Joost um 00:46:

 This is the actual structure. I made a find ./ -type d in the gimp-help-2
 and removed the CVS directorys:

Agreed. Howver since a few persons are not too happy with the
all-languages-concurrently approach I'd like to hear their opinion

 The ./src directory contain all the sources, including XML files,
 stylesheets and images.

I don't like the stylesheets being in one directory with the source
though because everything gets mixed together this way.

 german and france, as well as in mostly english. Unfortunately, the
 english part is mostly undone and i hope, syngin will close the gaps :)

I'm afraid this won't happen and I'm certainly *not* happy about it. :(


Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Re: [Gimp-developer] Re: Gimp 1.3.22

2003-11-16 Thread Tor Lillqvist
I wrote:
  If you are using MSVC, I guess the real question is, is there any
  chance that we will be able to claim supporting a MSVC build out of
  the box with a straight face? 

Hans Breuer writes:
  Probably not, at least not until the issues outlined in

The first issue there is about building fontconfig. Why assume
somebody building *GIMP* with MSVC would want to build *everything* it
depends on, too?

  Though I still have plans to extend Pango to allow 
  'render to bitmap' and 'get glyph outlines' at least with two 
  backends (win32 and FT2), there seems to be noone else interested.

Well, at least for me the issue is that I haven't investigated deeply
enough of this to understand your point...

  almost unmaintained, and requires manual intervention on the builder's
  system. Is manual editing needed for the makefile.msc files? 

  Only if there are files added or removed, so usually not that much
  when getting stable again ...

But surely the current stuff in module.defs, for instance, which
requires you to have the various dependency *sources* unpacked as
siblings to your GIMP source directory, is not a good idea? The
build/win32 stuff should be changed to use pkg-config and *installed*
developer packages of glib, gtk etc.

And that's not only for the glib/gtk/etc sources. For instance,
module.defs has the line: INTL = $(TOP)/gettext-0.10.40/intl even if
the prebuilt binary Win32 distributions of glib etc haven't used
gettext-0.10.40 for ages. The latest gettext-runtime distribution for
Win32 from FSF is what should be used.

Yes, I know that using pkg-config in a nmake makefile is not
straightforward (due to the lack of backticks in the Win32 shells),
but it can be done through some hackery involving building indirect
command line option files, and/or building temporary .bat files at
nmake time.

Whenever I look at the stuff in build/win32 I get so depressed and
feel that it should be junked altogether...

  (If the GIMP's build directory is to be included in tarballs, it should
  be added to the top

  It isn't as noted above, so please don't.

Then the build should be removed from gimp's line in
CVSROOT/modules . Will this have some odd consequences, or can it be
done right away? (It probably should be removed from gtk+'s
CVSROOT/modules line as well.)


Gimp-developer mailing list