On Sun, 18 Dec 2005, Daniel Pekelharing wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 15:29 +0100, David Necas (Yeti) wrote: > > Unless you depend on a particular bugfix, you should require > > 2.y.0 as the minimum version (e.g., 2.6.0), as microversions > > are quite compatible. > > > > Each class, method, or other symbol has a note in API docs > > which version of Gtk+ it appeared in (or it should have such > > a note). Of course, if you wrote the app without caring > > about compatibility with older verions, checking the status > > of each used symbol now is not very practical. > > > > I'd recommend to simply compile and *test* the app > > successively with Gtk+ 2.4, 2.2, 2.0 till it stops to > > build/work. Although all 2.x versions are essentially > > backward compatible, there were various subtle behavioural > > changes that may prove critical just for your app and > > something can behave oddly even if it builds. No > > compatibility list will tell you that. > > > > If you do not care so much, requiring 2.6.0 should be a safe > > bet. > > Thanks for the info! > > I guess I'll just go with requiring 2.6.0, > seeing as the only older versions I have are in rpm packages, > I don't think it would be easy to install them next to my current > version... > > -- > Daniel Pekelharing > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > _______________________________________________ > gtk-app-devel-list mailing list > gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list > guessing doenst seem to be the right way on that. matt _______________________________________________ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
