Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-11 Thread Pete Nagy
I've found these useful: http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/porting/ http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/gtk-changes-2-0.html http://gtkglext.sourceforge.net/reference/gtkglext/ http://inigo.katxi.org/docs/Python2/pygtk-faq.html#2.3 -> Pete ---

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-10 Thread David Morse
Is there any porting guide or migration guide for gtk-1.2 -> gtk 2.0 ? ___ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list gtk-app-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-app-devel-list

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-08 Thread Christopher Anderson
Madeningly, it is not included with Fedora, or Mandrake. Fortunately, on Mandrake at least, it is easy to install with urpmi (assuming correct repositories are set up). I assume it can also easily be installed on Fedora with yum. Chris Anderson On 7/7/05, Ken Siersma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread Ken Siersma
David Necas (Yeti) wrote: On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:37:03PM -0400, David Morse wrote: What's up with gtkglarea? The version in Fedora Core 4 has its most recent ChangeLog entry in 2002. The author's page for it is 404. GtkGLArea is effectively dead. GtkGLExt is a much better rep

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread Pete Nagy
Gee, I just spent months porting the 1.2 dependent OpenEV application to gtk2. The lackadaisical 'why don't you just use 2.0' illustrates the problem nicely. gtk2 may not have been a huge change over 1.2, but more problematic was the corresponding pygtk change, throw in a few other gtk1.2 depend

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread André Pedralho
Sorry! I think it was on another mailing list! However, why don't you use GTK 2.0? On 7/7/05, André Pedralho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we don't have support to GTK 1.2, do we? Why don't you use the GTK > 2.0?? > > On 7/7/05, David Morse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/7/05, David

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread André Pedralho
I think we don't have support to GTK 1.2, do we? Why don't you use the GTK 2.0?? On 7/7/05, David Morse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/7/05, David Necas (Yeti) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:37:03PM -0400, David Morse wrote: > > > What's up with gtkglarea? The versio

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread David Morse
On 7/7/05, David Necas (Yeti) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:37:03PM -0400, David Morse wrote: > > What's up with gtkglarea? The version in Fedora Core 4 has its most > > recent ChangeLog entry in 2002. The author's page for it is 404. > > GtkGLArea is effectively dead.

Re: What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-07 Thread David Necas (Yeti)
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:37:03PM -0400, David Morse wrote: > What's up with gtkglarea? The version in Fedora Core 4 has its most > recent ChangeLog entry in 2002. The author's page for it is 404. GtkGLArea is effectively dead. GtkGLExt is a much better replacement for Gtk+2 apps. > Yet its p

What's the deal with gtkglarea?

2005-07-06 Thread David Morse
What's up with gtkglarea? The version in Fedora Core 4 has its most recent ChangeLog entry in 2002. The author's page for it is 404. Yet its popular enough to be in every distro. I thought I'd test compatibility of my app with Fedora Core 4. The compile barfs on this source code (which is ripp