Re: Gimp problem [SOLVED]
Le 21/09/2011 18:07, tv.debian@googlemail.com a écrit :
>> 18/09/2011 18:01, tv.debian@googlemail.com wrote:
>>> 18/09/2011 14:50, Frank McCormick wrote:
>>>
>>> I posted this question on the GIMP list but no one seems to know the
>>> answer.
>>> When I open an image in the latest GIMP 2.6 on Debian Sid the file
>>> extension choice window is too small and can't be resized or moved.
>>> This is an example of what happens. It
>>> It's only a minor annoyance but I'd like to be able to fix it if possible.
>>> Any suggestions?
>>>
>>> http://imagebin.org/172940
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Hi, I don't have time to troubleshoot it now, but I can confirm I have
>> the same problem. I use kde as my DE and I strongly suspect an
>> "oxygen-gtk" or some other kde restyling of gtk apps weirdness. I don't
>> think gimp is touched by any gtk3 transition right now, but I can be
>> wrong since I don't follow gtk evolution closely.
>> Or maybe just a gimp bug introduced by the latest update (I remember
>> seeing one not long ago). I'll investigate later today, but feel free to
>> find a cure first and share it ;-) !
>>
>>
>
> I was wrong, the issue isn't related to kde gtk styling, I narrowed it
> down to those packages, downgrading them solves the problem:
>
> gtk2-engines-oxygen 1.1.3-1 -> 1.1.2-1 (only on KDE)
>
> libgail18 2.24.6-1 -> 2.24.4-3
> libgtk2.0-0 2.24.6-1 -> 2.24.4-3
> libgtk2.0-bin 2.24.6-1 -> 2.24.4-3
> librsvg2-2 2.34.1-2 -> 2.34.0-1
> librsvg2-bin 2.34.1-2 -> 2.34.0-1
> librsvg2-common 2.34.1-2 -> 2.34.0-1
>
>
> The bug shows up in Inkscape too, and probably many other gtk apps. I'll
> try to work out which one of those packages to file a bug against, if
> someone has more free time/is more gtk-savy than me feel free to file
> the bug and pass the number around ;-) .
>
> Cheers.
>
Hi, for those who still care about this issue, following a bug report on
libgtk2.0-0 I got an answer from the maintainer stating that the problem
is now fixed in packages versions 2.24.6-2. This was an upstream regression.
Cheers.
Reply to: