Is there any good/documented way to take a GtkStyle and convert it to a
GtkTextTag?
What I'm trying to do is allow set up of a standard gtkrc file, and be able
to
customize the font color for different messages that my program will print in
the GtkText.
I have working code that uses
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs you saw has only been fixed
in 2.10.7. Another set
[ Removing gnome-announce-list and gnome-hackers from the Cc ]
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 04:44 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
My memory, of course, is not getting better as years go by, but it still
remembers some peculiar things.
OK, on the official gtk site one can read:
On 1/6/07, Tomasz Kłoczko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This version fails on make check on:
PASS: base64-test
** ERROR **: naive_bit_nth_lsf (18446744073709551615, 31) = 32;
builtin_bit_nth_lsf1 (18446744073709551615, 31) = 0; aborting...
/bin/sh: line 4: 26024 Aborted
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs you saw has only been fixed
in 2.10.7. Another set
On Saturday 06 January 2007 08:38, Lyonel Vincent wrote:
Hi all,
I've released a first working version of a GDK-Pixbuf loader for OS X
icons. It's still a bit rough but it allows using .icns icon files as
easily as if they were PNG images (as custom icons in Nautilus,
thumbnails are
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs you saw has only been
[ Removing gnome-announce-list and gnome-hackers from the Cc ]
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 04:44 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
My memory, of course, is not getting better as years go by, but it still
remembers some peculiar things.
OK, on the official gtk site one can read:
On 1/6/07, Tomasz Kłoczko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This version fails on make check on:
PASS: base64-test
** ERROR **: naive_bit_nth_lsf (18446744073709551615, 31) = 32;
builtin_bit_nth_lsf1 (18446744073709551615, 31) = 0; aborting...
/bin/sh: line 4: 26024 Aborted
Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 18:31 -0600, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Owen Taylor wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 18:31 -0600, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 -
Hey guys - GTK+ isn't the only software that has new features,
that may or may not contain new bugs, and may or may not contain
fixed bugs.
I don't see what the fuss is about. Personally, I suggest that if
you cannot answer the question of whether you should use 2.8 or
2.10 using your own
--- Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
GTK+ 2.10.7 is now available for download at:
ftp://ftp.gtk.org/pub/gtk/v2.10/
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gtk+/2.10/
gtk+-2.10.7.tar.bz2 md5sum: acb0c10be4495928db68d2279e34f20c
gtk+-2.20.7.tar.gzmd5sum:
Hi all,
I've released a first working version of a GDK-Pixbuf loader for OS X
icons. It's still a bit rough but it allows using .icns icon files as
easily as if they were PNG images (as custom icons in Nautilus,
thumbnails are generated in GQview and gThumb, as patterns in GIMP etc.)
Version
On Saturday 06 January 2007 08:38, Lyonel Vincent wrote:
Hi all,
I've released a first working version of a GDK-Pixbuf loader for OS X
icons. It's still a bit rough but it allows using .icns icon files as
easily as if they were PNG images (as custom icons in Nautilus,
thumbnails are
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 04:44:40AM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
My memory, of course, is not getting better as years go by, but it still
remembers some peculiar things.
OK, on the official gtk site one can read:
http://www.gtk.org/faq/#AEN703 :
5.28. Why does GTK+/GLib leak
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs you saw has only been fixed
in 2.10.7. Another set
--- Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 00:24 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
[really impressive list of bugs deleted].
As an end gtk+ user I just want to know which of the two
gtk+2.8.20 - 2.10.7 is less buggy.
Indeed 2.10.7. The impressive list of bugs
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 05:11:58AM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
But what matters to me is that the 5.28 FAQ says gtk+ does not leak memory,
5.28 explains why memory consumption shown by some tools
that people interpret as leaks cannot be simply interpreted
so.
To claim absolutely something
--- David Neèas (Yeti) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Read it `there are no known memory leaks in the current
version' instead of assuming the absence of memory leaks was
formally proved. The trust quetion is something everyone
has to answer for himself.
Yeti
--
Whatever.
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 05:44:44AM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
Please reread the proposed clarification:
* for gtk+2.8.20 there are no known to developers occurences of memory leaks;
* gtk+2.10.* is effectively a developmnet release, so expect memory leaks and
stay
away from it for
--- David Neèas (Yeti) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 05:44:44AM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
Please reread the proposed clarification:
* for gtk+2.8.20 there are no known to developers occurences of memory
leaks;
* gtk+2.10.* is effectively a developmnet
2007/1/6, Sergei Steshenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So, should everyone distrust the claim that there are no memory leaks in
2.8.20 ?
You don't want to understand the meaning on the sentence in the FAQ,
where is the point in going on with this rant? Behdad and David have
already explained the
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 06:48:06AM -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
That is, it is fixed in current 2.10 because nobody wants to fix it in 2.8.20
or
because there is no such leak in 2.8.20 ?
I hoped `not fixed in 2.8.20' has a clear meaning.
Please give the reference to the claim 2.8 is
i think what Sergei has been saying, while becoming a bit convoluted
after a few iterations, is obvious, and you said it yourself: be
accurate when placing information on a FAQ: could it be made more
accurate? if yes, then make it so. why all the arguing about a yes
or no question?
but
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 04:36:43PM +0100, Richard Boaz wrote:
in all seriousness, how many of the gtk+ developers actually have to
use gtk+ in the real world?
I'm not a Gtk+ developer, I don't endorse Gtk+ developers'
decisions and actions and they don't endorse mine.
problems, in
--- Gian Mario Tagliaretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/1/6, Sergei Steshenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So, should everyone distrust the claim that there are no memory leaks in
2.8.20 ?
You don't want to understand the meaning on the sentence in the FAQ,
where is the point in going on with
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 12:01 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
--- Gian Mario Tagliaretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2007/1/6, Sergei Steshenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So, should everyone distrust the claim that there are no memory leaks in
2.8.20 ?
You don't want to understand the
I want to see the TRUTH in FAQ.
The truth? Impressive request. Which truth do you want? We have a a lot
of them.
This discussion gets to philosophical boundaries. I think, what's actually
meant here, is that he wants to sharpen the FAQ a little to be more
accurate.
That's
Richard Boaz writes:
some two years ago i asked about compiling static exe's to solve
the obvious distribution problem here, and the answer i got was
that this was not a good idea. In fact, after having put some
effort into it, I've concluded it's not possible (seems that the
gtk+
[ Removing gnome-announce-list and gnome-hackers from the Cc ]
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 04:44 -0800, Sergei Steshenko wrote:
My memory, of course, is not getting better as years go by, but it still
remembers some peculiar things.
OK, on the official gtk site one can read:
On 1/6/07, Tomasz Kłoczko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This version fails on make check on:
PASS: base64-test
** ERROR **: naive_bit_nth_lsf (18446744073709551615, 31) = 32;
builtin_bit_nth_lsf1 (18446744073709551615, 31) = 0; aborting...
/bin/sh: line 4: 26024 Aborted
--- David Neèas (Yeti) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
So what is wrong with the FAQ entry explaining why top is
not a good tool to find bugs in Gtk+ apps?
...
I was able to leave 'konqueror' for a week or so, and it didn't
crash, nor it showed increase of memory usgae.
Mozilla stuff shows
* muppet [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-01-04 19:55]:
Now, perl's looks_like_number() function is implemented like
this:
[snip]
It would be interesting to know which of those tests is failing
here. Are we failing on bad handling of get magic? Does the
Readonly variable refuse to be coerced into
muppet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That doesn't help you for entries, but why are you wanting to change
the font in an entry?
I just tried to change the font for an entry widget. For some reason I
want to change the weight.
$weight =
On Jan 6, 2007, at 11:11 AM, rahed wrote:
muppet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That doesn't help you for entries, but why are you wanting to change
the font in an entry?
I just tried to change the font for an entry widget. For some reason I
want to change the weight.
$weight =
hi all;
On Thu, 2007-01-04 at 21:09 -0500, muppet wrote:
* You're using spaces for indention whereas the surrounding code uses
tabs. Thus, at least with a tab width of 8, the code doesn't line up.
Experience has shown that you should never alter the size of a tab,
but instead tell
muppet [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It looks like you actually got a copy of the font description from
Gtk2::Style::font_desc, which means your changes aren't happening to
the object in place. Odd. Try using modify_font(), instead:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use Gtk2 -init;
my $window =
* zentara [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-01-06 17:55]:
I wanted to add a SimpleList to a ScrolledWindow, then auto
scroll to the end.
What is the best way to force the scrollbar to the end? I have
a bad hack that works below, but I'm sure I'm overlooking
something. :-)
You’ll have to experiment
On Jan 6, 2007, at 11:50 AM, zentara wrote:
I'm hitting a mental block today.
If i have a day when that doesn't happen, i get very worried. :-P
I wanted to add a SimpleList to a ScrolledWindow,
then auto scroll to the end.
Is this auto scroll on *any* appended rows, or particular
41 matches
Mail list logo
