Re: lablgtk2 -> lablgtk transition.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 08:20:09PM +0200, sylvain.le-gall@polytechnique.org wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 03:42:01PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Altough it is still unanounced, lablgtk upstream has released lablgtk
> > 2.4.0. I don't know what that means with regard to lablgtk1
> > compatibility, but i will probably have the lablgtk package be this new
> > lablgtk2 descendent, and provide a lablgtk1 package for backward
> > compatibility.
> >
>
> Hello,
>
> Well, at least for package mldonkey, there is still package using
> lablgtk ( version 1 ). Off course, i can patch this kind of package, but
> i also think that there is package using lablgtk2 ( ie not lablgtk ),
> taking for example camlimages...
>
> Well, i am not an expert, but i think that the current split
> lablgtk/lablgtk2 is accepted and changing this could lead to more
> disturbance than advantages... Maybe you have better reason than mine to
> do this transition... Could you just told us what does involve ( in good
> ) this transition ?
Well, the upstream source is lablgtk, and no more lablgtk2. It will also
no more leave clutter when we remove lablgtk1, but apart from that i
don't see.
Furthermore the ocamllibdir subdir and dllname is stimm lablgtk2, so i
am reconsidering. Also see my mail about this on the lablgtk2 list.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: