Re: Win32 binaries for GTK+ 2.4.9

> 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
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 is the
official website this mailing list is the offical gtk development
mailing list and is the official windows32
port. Probably of more relevence would be the statement is the offical gtk
build for debian unstable.

Jared Kells
kared kared net

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]