> > I don't think that support for different Moitfs are needed. > > All known software despite of being compiled with Motif 2.0 does not > > use features not present in Motif 1.2 > > The reason for this is that "big unices" does not have Motif 2.0 actively > > shiped from the vendors yet and using Motif 2.0 features would make your > > application imposible to port. *When* situation changes, I don't think > > that anyone using Motif for i386 Linux would have Motif 1.2 > > > > (And franckly speaking, 2.0 also. By that time all vendors will be > > shipping 2.1 which would _hopefully_ be compiled against glibc for Linux) > > > > Alex Y. > > > > But things linked against Motif 2.0 cannot link against and run with a > Motif 1.2 library. Take for example nedit-dmotif, currently in
Not true. > contrib. Try to run it on Lesstif and it won't work, because it will > not find a Motif 2.0 library. Lesstif provides a Motif 1.2 lib. Yeah, but Lesstif was not meant to be *binary* compatible with real Motif, only *source code* compatible! Alex Y. > When I compiled nedit, I used a Motif 2.0 library. I agree with > Chris that we should have both a motif12 and a motif20 virtual package. > > -Erik -- _ _( )_ ( (o___ | _ 7 ''' \ (") (O O) / \ \ +---------------oOO--(_)--------------------+ | \ __/ <-- | Alexander Yukhimets [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | | | http://pages.nyu.edu/~aqy6633/ | ( / +-------------------------oOO---------------+ \ / |__|__| ) /(_ || || | (___) ooO Ooo \___) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .