Am Samstag, den 28.01.2006, 13:18 +0100 schrieb Georg Baum: > > I should see about setting up a build environment with some older libs > > (or possibly fix the gtkmm docs so that they tell me these things...) > > I compile the frontend regularly (but never use it) in order to make sure > that I don't break anything. I'll complain if something like that happens > again ;-) Thank you.
> In fact I wanted to complain about the gdk image rotations you introduced > lately, because that means that I can't compile with debian sarge > anymore, but since it would be very cumbersome to work around that I > backported gtkmm from unstable instead. Right, I didn't realise at the time that I was introducing a gtkmm 2.6 dependency with some of the pixbuf stuff. I could put an #if around it for the convenience of those compiling it for the moment (ultimately that code needs replacing with something better anyway). However, unless you desperately want me to, I won't do that because I would like to depend on 2.6, for the FileChooserButton widget. I know that at the time we moved from the gtkmm 2.2 API to the 2.4 API there was some objection over the inconvenience of having latest libraries around. I appreciate this (speaking as someone who had to manually compile and install gtkmm into his home directory on his work machine...), but I really think it's worth it - I don't intend to depend on anything incredibly bleeding edge. The next time this issue comes up may be when I reproach the Painter class - I've been contemplating the possibility of drawing using the Cairo library (integrated with the GNOME 2.8 series), for uber-sexy output. But that'd be a while yet. > What would be really useful to have: A configure check for the minimum > required gtk* libraries. Yes, this would be good. Unfortunately, I don't know anything about autotools, I guess we need something in configure.ac that checks the GTKMM_VERSION variable that we already have in there? So can someone that knows autotools put in a check for gtkmm 2.6 or above? John
