Re: gdk-pixbuf to GTK
- From: Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>
- To: gtk-devel-list redhat com
- Cc: federico nuclecu unam mx
- Subject: Re: gdk-pixbuf to GTK
- Date: 23 Mar 2000 17:25:09 -0500
Owen Taylor <otaylor@redhat.com> writes:
> Havoc Pennington <hp@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > At GUADEC we talked about moving gdk-pixbuf to be a GTK dependency, or
> > possibly included in the GTK+ package. This lets us use GdkPixbuf
> > instead of GdkPixmap for various GTK APIs (such as CList), and also
> > removes the need for GnomePixmap.
> >
> > Basically to do this we need to remove the libart
> > dependency. gdk-pixbuf doesn't depend on libart in any real way (it
> > uses an enumeration or two, and the ArtPixbuf struct).
> >
> > So, the questions are:
> >
> > - any objections or comments on the general concept?
>
> I'm in favor of doing this, though this would introduce (optional)
> libtiff, libpng, and libjpeg dependencies for GTK+. XPM simply
> is not a good format, and having that be the only native image
> format for GTK+ is rather silly.
>
> The question is whether the right thing to do is:
>
> a) Remove the libart dependency from gdk-pixbuf and put it
> gdk-pixbuf all into GTK+
> b) Bundle the non-GDK-specific parts of gdk-pixbuf together
> with libart in a separate package, make that a dependency
> of GTK+, and then put the GDK-specific parts of gdk-pixbuf
> into GDK.
>
> > - specifically how would we like to remove the libart dependency?
> >
> > my suggestion is a struct just like ArtPixbuf but with a
> > different name that comes with gdk-pixbuf, thus we avoid breaking
> > current apps using gdk-pixbuf
>
> I think we should go ahead, break the apps (trivially) and fix
> the stupid GdkPixbuf structure to be sane:
>
> struct _GdkPixbuf {
> /* Reference count */
> int ref_count;
>
> /* Libart pixbuf */
> ArtPixBuf *art_pixbuf;
> };
OK, it's been pointed out to me that the above is very unclear.
What the above is is the current (broken) structure. What I
was suggesting in is that we have a single structure with
a reference count instead of the one structure pointing to
the other.
Regards,
Owen
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]