Re: Win32 binaries for GTK+ 2.4.9

[Jared Kells <kared kared net>]

> Not really, nor should there be. Different sites/people have widely
> varying conventions/needs. Home users typically have just one hard
> drive "C:". But some machines (like mine, for instance) don't have any
> "C:" drive at all. Larger installations want the stuff on a network
> drive. Folders like "Program Files" have localized names on
> non-English Windows machines. Etc.

Xav is 100% correct on this Program Files and infact Program
Files\Common Files are special directorys that can be resolved using the
registry or with envirotment variables.

>  > I have seen some installers install gtk to system32 
> 
> I hope they don't put the DLLs directly in system32? That would be
> very silly. Installing a GTK subfolder in system32 is perhaps not a
> very good idea either.

I agree pretty much... But thats how its done in the *nix world.
Libraries are usually mostly in one or 2 directories or subfolders of
them. You could consider %system32% as /usr/lib...
kared sasuke:~$ ls /usr/lib/ | wc -l
1171
kared sasuke:~

Maybe its not too bad to put the .dll's in system32 as long as you have
a very accurate un-installer.. I mean plenty of linux installers install
into /usr/lib directly.

> "official" means there would be paid staff sitting in their offices
> planning and implementing GTK for Windows. Not likely. At least that's
> how I interpret the term. 

I interpret it the same way as i would say http://www.gtk.org/ is the
official website this mailing list is the offical gtk development
mailing list and http://www.gimp.org/win32/ is the official windows32
port. Probably of more relevence would be the statement 
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/libs/libgtk2.0-0 is the offical gtk
build for debian unstable.

-- 
Jared Kells
kared kared net
www.kared.net