[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: graphics or text as default?

On 5/15/06, Attilio Fiandrotti <fiandro@tiscali.it> wrote:
Frans Pop wrote:
> On Monday 15 May 2006 09:53, Stefano Canepa wrote:
>>      the CD images with both graphical and textual installer will run
>>graphical as default?
> In the short run we will use the newt (text) frontend as default.
> I feel we should wait at least until the new upstream libraries are
> available to switch to the gtk (gui) as default because with current libs
> the fonts can be distorted which is quite ugly.
> Given that the freeze for Etch will start fairly soon now, it may be that
> this means g-i default will only happen post-Etch.

What about using GTK libraries from CVS ? i386 experimental udebs i
built some times ago proved to work well (better than 2.0.9 regarding
fonts) and i can tell you the DFB backend they contain is much more
robust than the one contained in 2.0.9 libraries (which was nothing more
than an hacky set of patches applied to standard 2.0.9 GTK libraries,
far away from being bugless).
CVS 27-03-2006 snapshot i used to build udebs is the last known to work
without patches, but there are some patches that need to be applied to
make GTK's HEAD compile with the DFB backend i sent some times ago to
Mike and that should be applied as soon as Mike founds the time to do it.
A good compromise would be using GTK+ 2.9.0 sources with the above
patches applied: i'll try to produce such a patchfile and to make it
available togheter with i386 udebs from GTK 2.9.0 snapshot.

Do you have the source packages somewhere? or were they hacked binaries ?

The patches are not a problem as we could use dpatch/quilt for the patches.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein

Reply to: