On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 10:46:32AM +0530, arthy geraldin wrote:
> I'm new to gtk and this is the first time I'm installing it.I've installed
> all the dependencies for gtk.
Is it absolutely necessary to install Gtk+ from source code?
Doesn't Gtk+ packages exist for your system?
> When I'm trying
quoting from:
http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/gtk-Keyboard-Accelerators.html#gtk-accelerator-parse
"Parses a string representing an accelerator. The format looks like
"a" or "F1" or "z" (the last one is for
key release). The parser is fairly liberal and allows lower or upper
case,
Hello,
I'm new to gtk and this is the first time I'm installing it.I've installed all
the dependencies for gtk.
When I'm trying to give a ./configure inside the gtk+-2.10.0 directory I get
the following error.
checking return type of signal handlers... (cached) void
checking for x86 platform.
I'd really like to implement this old Window Interface library based on
Motif with GtkBoxes, but I simply cannot accurately predict when the
application code needs an hbox or a vbox, or switch an old hbox to a vbox.
The library I'm trying to implement with Gtk must be able to put boxes
within boxes
Gerald I. Evenden wrote:
> 2. A side thread suggested that in order to understand the usage of a system
> like libglade one should study the source.
I think that's pretty standard practice where any open source
library/development system is concerned. Having full reference
documentation, tutori
I have made a major mistake here. Apparently google is indexing the old
libglade-1.0 stuff rather than the new stuff. The 2.0 docs are here:
http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/libglade/index.html
Note that for any gnome-related library, you can find the api and
reference docs at:
http://de
On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 13:46 -0500, Gerald I. Evenden wrote:
> A the originator of this thread I will rephrase my problems and make a larger
> scale complaint.
>
> 1. My original complaint was compile/linking glade output. Thanks to M.
> Torrie this problem was nicely solved and I can compile/li
On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 13:46 -0500, Gerald I. Evenden wrote:
[...]
> I would love to be proved wrong about libglade documentation so please flame
> me if I am and point out my sins. Even though I am now able to compile/link
> libglade code I find that I am now stymied by lack of documentation on
A the originator of this thread I will rephrase my problems and make a larger
scale complaint.
1. My original complaint was compile/linking glade output. Thanks to M.
Torrie this problem was nicely solved and I can compile/link several examples
from various sources.
2. A side thread suggested
May be a complete example on how put all together will be usefull
2007/2/14, David Nečas (Yeti) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 02:52:02PM -0600, Daniel Espinosa wrote:
> > 1) The text "when they register a closure to be invoked upon the
> > signal emission" is not clear what i
On Thu, 2007-02-15 at 05:55 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> You took it back to the point. I think metaphors don't help much here.
> The question is whether usage examples belong to the documentation or
> not. As we see, this question is debatable. Personally, I'd side clearly
> with the "y
On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 14:44 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> The users manual should be provided with every copy of a packaged
> distribution. The user's manual should provide sufficient instruction
> on how to operate libglade. If a developer finds himself needing to
> refer to the source
12 matches
Mail list logo
