public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Harring <ferringb@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK und GTK2 Use Flag
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:43:01 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050329224300.GG29694@exodus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1112129340.3694.13.camel@Darkmere>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2731 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 10:49:00PM +0200, Spider wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 12:15 +0200, Fabian Zeindl wrote:
> > Hello
> > 
> > There was a discussion on the gentoo-user-de list about this two
> > Useflags: gtk and gtk2. Because not everybody is sure what the mean, so
> > if you have -gtk +gtk2 some think that gtk2 should be installed and soon.
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better if "gtk" meaned that the newest available gtk
> > version ist installed (gtk1 or gtk2) and a flag like oldgtk take the
> > older version gtk1.
> > 
> > Another question which occured: Is there a performancedrawback if a
> > program is compile with gtk1 AND gtk2 build in? Does this happen when
> > someone installs with +gtk +gtk2?
> 
> 
> Common misconception, it tends to crop up once every 6 months or so
> since I ever was foolish enough not to stomp a hard policy and beat the
> people who want gtk+-1.2 support with a sledgehammer.
while I'm certainly not advocating that the user is always 
right... user requirements/desires for the tree should be reflected, 
not have mandates handed down.  (realize you didn't quite mean it that 
way, but it plays into my point so I took a shot at it :)

> If someone can suggest a better formulation for this, please go ahead.
Start the process of adjusting ebuilds so that the use flags reflect 
what everybody thinks they should.

I've seen countless users (despite use.desc) flip on *just* gtk2, 
because they want *just* gtk v2 support linked in if available.

> Lets face it,  gtk+-1.2 is _deprecated_ and all packages that use it
> should either be taken out and shot in the head, ( for mercy's sake,
> that and utf8 )    or updated to track the new and maintained library
> API. 
> We all know this isn't feasible, most projects are just recently wiping
> stale code for interfaces ( Hi mozilla! )  and as such, the mistake is
> left to stay.
> 
> -Changing-  existing logic is -not- going to solve this solution
> cleanly.   We suggested to remove the gtk2 flag,  (make it default) and
> implement :
> USE="shoot-me-in-the-head-with-deprecated-libraries-please"   instead,
> however people considered it as offending our users for some reason.
How is this any different (aside from naming) gtk1 vs gtk2?  

Only actual difference I see is sticking 'deprecated' or something equivalent 
into the use flag name, and mandating the default gtk+- version that 
is used, rather then just exposing the options via use flags, and 
letting users decide for themselves.

Aside from that, as I stated in another email, such an approach is 
going to bite you in the ass on the next major gtk release, 
wash rinse repeat (lesson learned being?)
~brian

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2005-03-29 22:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-03-29 10:15 [gentoo-dev] GTK und GTK2 Use Flag Fabian Zeindl
2005-03-29 10:58 ` Stefan Sperling
2005-03-29 11:04   ` Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
2005-03-29 11:11     ` Stefan Sperling
2005-03-29 11:24       ` Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
2005-03-29 11:35         ` David Morgan
2005-03-29 11:50           ` Brian Harring
2005-03-29 13:09             ` David Morgan
2005-03-29 13:39               ` Brian Harring
2005-03-29 14:19                 ` David Morgan
2005-03-29 15:38                   ` Stefan Sperling
2005-03-29 17:20                     ` Markus Nigbur
2005-03-29 21:35                       ` foser
2005-03-29 21:42                         ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-03-30  9:00                           ` Paul de Vrieze
2005-03-29 22:29                         ` Brian Harring
2005-03-29 22:46                           ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-03-29 23:09                             ` Olivier Crête
2005-03-29 23:13                           ` foser
2005-03-29 23:33                             ` Brian Harring
2005-03-30  4:32                               ` Dulmandakh Sukhbaatar
2005-03-30  8:44                             ` Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
2005-03-29 11:05   ` Stefan Sperling
2005-03-29 11:11   ` Brian Harring
2005-03-29 20:49 ` Spider
2005-03-29 22:43   ` Brian Harring [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050329224300.GG29694@exodus \
    --to=ferringb@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox