On Tue, 21 Oct 2008, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> >> Was there a compelling reason for this reversion?
>
> Not really. As has already been said, if/when the GDI+ -based
> pixbuf loaders would be used, then it would hopefully be 100%
> clear that it makes sense to build them as built-in in the
> gdk-
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 7:20 PM, Tor Lillqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Was there a compelling reason for this reversion?
>
> Not really. As has already been said, if/when the GDI+ -based pixbuf
> loaders would be used, then it would hopefully be 100% clear that it
> makes sense to build them
>> Was there a compelling reason for this reversion?
Not really. As has already been said, if/when the GDI+ -based pixbuf
loaders would be used, then it would hopefully be 100% clear that it
makes sense to build them as built-in in the gdk-pixbuf DLL. But now
when I was forced to revert to the lib
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Daniel Atallah wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But I see that the current GTK 2.14.4 package
>> > ( http://www.gtk.org/download-windows.html
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Daniel Atallah wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > But I see that the current GTK 2.14.4 package
>> > ( http://www.gtk.org/download-windows.html
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Daniel Atallah wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But I see that the current GTK 2.14.4 package
> > ( http://www.gtk.org/download-windows.html ) has reverted to a
> > monolithic build, so that a gtk app won't start without
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Allin Cottrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A while back some app developers who have need of GTK+ on MS
> Windows, yet whose apps use only a subset of the available
> image-loaders, requested that the build of the Windows packages be
> made modular (as it was in t
My software uses Alt modifier but the Alt key is now
blocked by Gnome. A quick solution is to use key presses
for generating mouse button presses.
How to generate them?
A method found from the mail archives is
win = gdk_window_at_pointer(&wx, &wy);
event.type = GDK_BUTTON_PRESS;
event.but
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Juhana Sadeharju <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> About Glade. I tried to create something simple (which I don't
> remember now) it didn't succeed. The menubar was simple, but
> this equally simple thing was too hard. I will check it again
> and post to glade lists so
About Glade. I tried to create something simple (which I don't
remember now) it didn't succeed. The menubar was simple, but
this equally simple thing was too hard. I will check it again
and post to glade lists someday.
It would be nice if there would be complete examples which
could be grabbed an
A while back some app developers who have need of GTK+ on MS
Windows, yet whose apps use only a subset of the available
image-loaders, requested that the build of the Windows packages be
made modular (as it was in the old days). That way, one can slim
down the packaging of one's app, skipping
Is it safe to pass an iter as a parameter to a function?
Thanks,
Dave
___
gtk-app-devel-list mailing list
gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
12 matches
Mail list logo
