Thanks for the confirmation, Brian. I wasn't aware that Gtk+2 was abandoned for
so long - then our 2.24.17 binaries are in fact quite reasonable and I'll go
with that.
Thanks,
Simon
> On 4/04/2020, at 9:11 PM, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>
> On 04/04/2020 05:15, Tom Elliott wrote:
>> Simon,
If we have working 2.24.17 binaries, let's just use them. GTK+ was already
super mature by that point; it's unlikely that many improvements/fixes were
made. I'll start looking into RGtk3. Actually, I started that like 8 years
ago.
Michael
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 9:43 AM Kevin Ushey wrote:
> For
On 04/04/2020 05:15, Tom Elliott wrote:
Simon,
Hence this is a call to the R community to see if anyone actually cares.
I (and Chris Wild and quite a few of our mac users) care and would greatly
appreciate working GTK+ CRAN packages!
I don't have any knowledge re source etc, but just to
Simon,
> Hence this is a call to the R community to see if anyone actually cares.
I (and Chris Wild and quite a few of our mac users) care and would greatly
appreciate working GTK+ CRAN packages!
I don't have any knowledge re source etc, but just to remind you that the
current RGtk2 package
For what it's worth, Homebrew and macports both have scripts for
installing GTK+ from sources, so presumedly those could be cribbed
into a standalone shell script for a build if desired:
https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/master/Formula/gtk+.rb
