Re: graphics or text as default?
On Mon, May 15, 2006 at 07:04:50PM +0200, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote:
> Frans Pop wrote:
> >On Monday 15 May 2006 16:46, Attilio Fiandrotti wrote:
> >>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).
> >We could look at that, but I will not have time until after my holidays.
> I'm more and more convinced that a patched GTK 2.9.0 set of libraries
> would be a reasonable solution for the g-i while waiting for GTK 2.10 to
> be released.
> This would allow us to spot potential problems that could arise with
> recent GTK libraries even before GTK 2.10 is released (and some were
> prevously detected using the udebs form CVS).
> Many improvements introduced in GTK > 2.8 are related to advanced
> functionalities (printing system, async file chooser..) that the g-i
> does not make use of at all (the GTK frontend makes use of a very
> minimal set of classic GTK widgets) and so i think that bugs that may
> still be present in GTK 2.9.0 won't affect our g-i directly nor indirectly.
> Some time is indeed needed to create a patchfile, build experimental
> udebs etc.. () , so i guess you can enjoy your vacations while GTK 2.9.0
> is being fixed up for later udeb packaging :)
Another aspect not to forget about this too. We have made considerable effort
to bring the directfb code to gtk 2.9+. We have involved external folk outside
of d-i to help us and make this happen (I am thinking of Dennis and Mike in
particular here, but there may be others), and if we are going to end not
using it in etch after all, this may not be good for motivation for finding
help the next time we need it.
I had prepared a mail about this selfsame subject some time ago, but it got
eaten by my exim4 setup, and maybe better given the latest involvement,
because it was maybe a bit agressive :).
That said, another important point is, will we be using a separate gtk-dfb
2.9/2.10 package set, or will we be using the main gtk debian package ? In
this second case, are the gtk-gnome folk ready to move to gtk 2.10 for etch ?