Hi Jamey,Thanks for all the information!But I am just wondering whether I need to continue the entirely xcb-based Gtk-XCB backend. If necessary, I would like you to have a glance at my code, and any comments would be appreciated.
In addition, I will try to make gdk_window_queue just to iterate the
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 10:20:53PM -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Jamey Sharp wrote:
> > Assuming a project is willing to require the new version of Xlib, then
> > avoiding dual-maintenance hell is easy. The Xlib-specific interfaces (in
> > this case, gdkx.h) can still be provided; they become si
Jamey Sharp wrote:
> Assuming a project is willing to require the new version of Xlib, then
> avoiding dual-maintenance hell is easy. The Xlib-specific interfaces (in
> this case, gdkx.h) can still be provided; they become simple wrappers
> that first convert Xlib types to XCB types with help from
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 03:07:26PM +0800, Yang JianJun wrote:
> On 11/8/06, Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >That means a path forward would have to make maintaining both XCB and
> >libX11 GDK targets a viable option, i.e. just cut-and-pasting the X11
> >backend and modifying it to be
On 11/8/06, Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems pretty clear that gtk-x11 has to continue to be installed -gdkx.h is in the ABI.XCB is a replacement for Xlib, so if we contribute the gtk-xcb backend, it should replace gtk-x11. Accordingly, there is
gdkxcb.h, instead gdkx.h. Howeve
