On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 06:36:09PM +0200, Gabriele Greco wrote: > Michael Ekstrand wrote: > > You might want to take a look at what the autopackage folks are doing. > > At the very least, they have a lot of documentation on what's required > > to prepare relocatable, portable binary packages. > > > Anyway the GTK hardcoded path are not a good thing IMHO.
Well, Pango for instance uses environment variables to tell it where config files telling it where other files specifing where its modules reside. Isn't it enough? > Having relative paths in the gtk core libraries what problem could > cause? AFAIK you can relocate a Gtk+ installation using a combination of environment variables and config files. This way you can also relocate different things into different places. Not that I ever found any use for it... > Eg make libgtk-2.0.so try to load: > > ./gtk-2.0/2.10.0/loaders/libpixbufloader-gif.so > > Instead of: /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.10.0/loaders/libpixbufloader-gif.so > And the dot is exactly what? The current directory? Does the library know the directory it was loaded from? Should libraries break when symlinked? Yeti -- http://gwyddion.net/ _______________________________________________ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list
