Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is anyone who maintains a package depending on libglade up to this, or
> could the GNOME team adopt libglade?
>
> [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/06/msg01199.html
Since I'm the de facto gnome 1 weenie, being the last maintainer of a
big
In June I asked whether it would be possible to start a libglade to
libglade2 transition [1]. As it turns out, migrating applications to
libglade2 can be harder than expected and we can therefore assume that
libglade will stay with us for quite a while.
Unfortunately, libglade has been orphaned f
Andrea Mennucc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the same for me: I develop and mantain some gtk packages
>
> there is no such thing as an "easy transition from gtk1 to gtk2"
Nonsense. For many (most?) programs, it's mostly a matter of passing
-DENABLE_BROKEN and fixing up the build system. Doing s/gt
the same for me: I develop and mantain some gtk packages
there is no such thing as an "easy transition from gtk1 to gtk2"
Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>
>> And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
>> still requires GTK1. It would b
* Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-06-14 13:10]:
> Many of these are GNOME1.x-specific libraries, in turn used by GNOME1.x
> applications that as yet have no GNOME2 equivalent. (At the top of my
> personal list there is gnucash...)
Okay, given that GTK1 won't disappear immediately (and ma
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Will Newton wrote:
ISTR updating from the deprecated GtkCList to GtkTreeView is quite involved
This exactly is my problem that I'm heavily using GtkCLIst and did not found
a nice replacement. But I'll have a look at the link you provided.
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Tuesday 14 June 2005 23:09, Roger Leigh wrote:
> > I would be very thankful for links to aprorpiate search-and-replace
> > expressions or compatibility functions. Once I was searching for
> > this kind of stuff I failed.
>
> I don't have any links I'm afraid. I only learnt GTK+ 2.0, and never
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andreas Tille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Roger Leigh wrote:
>
>> That's true, but for the majority of code, which just uses existing
>> GtkObjects, conversion is no much more involved than
>> search-and-replace. Plus, if you d
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 01:42:46PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> libglade was orphaned 660 days ago and there's a libglade2 package in
> the archive. However, there are still 52 packages which depend or
> build-depend on the old libglade. Can someone please plan and
> coordinate a transition t
Martin Michlmayr wrote:
libglade was orphaned 660 days ago and there's a libglade2 package in
the archive. However, there are still 52 packages which depend or
build-depend on the old libglade. Can someone please plan and
coordinate a transition to libglade2 so libglade can eventually be
remove
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Roger Leigh wrote:
That's true, but for the majority of code, which just uses existing
GtkObjects, conversion is no much more involved than
search-and-replace. Plus, if you don't bother with the full
conversion, there's quite a lot of compatibility functions to make
things
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> * Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-06-14 13:48]:
>>> libglade2 is the GTK2 version of libglade, so it would have to be a
>>> GTK->GTK2 transition.
>>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:14:56PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>
> >And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
> >still requires GTK1. It would be great to move them all to GTK2.
> Unfortunately it's not that simple. I'm upstr
On Tue, 2005-06-14 at 13:55 +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > libglade2 is the GTK2 version of libglade, so it would have to be a
> > GTK->GTK2 transition.
>
> And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
> still requires GTK1. It would be great to move them all to GTK2.
It
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
still requires GTK1. It would be great to move them all to GTK2.
Unfortunately it's not that simple. I'm upstream for two packages using
GTK1 and I spended some time for investigatin
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-06-14 13:48]:
>> libglade2 is the GTK2 version of libglade, so it would have to be a
>> GTK->GTK2 transition.
>
> And how hard is that? It seems that tons of stuff in the archive
> still requires GTK1. It w
* Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-06-14 13:48]:
> > libglade was orphaned 660 days ago and there's a libglade2 package
> > in the archive. However, there are still 52 packages which depend
> > or build-depend on the old libglade. Can someone please plan and
> > coordinate a transition t
Martin Michlmayr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> libglade was orphaned 660 days ago and there's a libglade2 package in
> the archive. However, there are still 52 packages which depend or
> build-depend on the old libglade. Can someone please plan and
> coordinate a transition to libglade2 so libglad
libglade was orphaned 660 days ago and there's a libglade2 package in
the archive. However, there are still 52 packages which depend or
build-depend on the old libglade. Can someone please plan and
coordinate a transition to libglade2 so libglade can eventually be
removed?
The list of packages
19 matches
Mail list logo
