[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Porting GTK to Nano-X
From: Michael ROGERS ####@####.#### Date: 12 Jan 2000 18:07:37 -0000 Message-Id: Sorry for replying to the list - I can't remember who asked about this. GTK+ 1.4 will include support for Win32 and BeOS ports, and to facilitate this the codebase has been cleaned up, removing direct Xlib references in the GTK layer and generally making the separation between GDK and Xlib cleaner. So if you are thinking of porting GDK to Nano-X, you should probably wait for the 1.4 release. Michael Rogers | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: Porting GTK to Nano-X
From: Alan Cox ####@####.#### Date: 12 Jan 2000 18:18:46 -0000 Message-Id: <E128SBl-0006Sr-00@the-village.bc.nu> > and generally making the separation between GDK and Xlib cleaner. So if you > are thinking of porting GDK to Nano-X, you should probably wait for the 1.4 > release. Or take a look at the CVS tree | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
Re: Porting GTK to Nano-X
From: Michael ROGERS ####@####.#### Date: 12 Jan 2000 18:32:07 -0000 Message-Id: >Thanks for the info, Michael. Do you how much of this is already in the >beta, and how far the beta is away from 1.4? I'm afraid not - I just got this info from news.gnome.org. Owen Taylor ####@####.#### I think) made the announcement. Michael | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: Porting GTK to Nano-X
From: Greg Haerr ####@####.#### Date: 12 Jan 2000 21:54:45 -0000 Message-Id: <C1962B36D9BBD311B0F80060083DFEFB01EB19@SYS.CenSoft.COM> On Wednesday, January 12, 2000 10:57 AM, Michael ROGERS wrote: : Sorry for replying to the list - I can't remember who asked about this. GTK+ : 1.4 will include support for Win32 and BeOS ports, and to facilitate this the : codebase has been cleaned up, removing direct Xlib references in the GTK layer : and generally making the separation between GDK and Xlib cleaner. So if you : are thinking of porting GDK to Nano-X, you should probably wait for the 1.4 : release. I think Steve was asking. I agree that 1.4 is better, but I could still use input regarding missing functionality required in Nano-X so that we could be working on that while 1.4 final is being worked on. Greg | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subject:
RE: Porting GTK to Nano-X
From: Steven Ness ####@####.#### Date: 12 Jan 2000 21:59:42 -0000 Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001121345460.18375-100000@cyclone.stormix.com> Hi, Yep, I agree that 1.4 will be the best target. I've got the latest CVS, and the layout will make it much easier to port to nanoGUI. Kudos to the GTK maintainers. However, it looks like things are still in a bit of a state of flux with the current CVS, so I'll work on things that probably won't change too much at first, then go to the harder ones. Since GTK hasn't even gone to 1.3, it'll probably be a while until 1.4 comes out. :( Steven ####@####.#### [ Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employers. ] On Wed, 12 Jan 2000, Greg Haerr wrote: > On Wednesday, January 12, 2000 10:57 AM, Michael ROGERS wrote: > : Sorry for replying to the list - I can't remember who asked about this. > GTK+ > : 1.4 will include support for Win32 and BeOS ports, and to facilitate this > the > : codebase has been cleaned up, removing direct Xlib references in the GTK > layer > : and generally making the separation between GDK and Xlib cleaner. So if > you > : are thinking of porting GDK to Nano-X, you should probably wait for the > 1.4 > : release. > > I think Steve was asking. I agree that 1.4 is better, but I could > still use input regarding missing functionality required in Nano-X > so that we could be working on that while 1.4 final is being > worked on. > > Greg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.#### > For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.#### > | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>] |