Re: pixbuf<->cairo_surface_t conversion

[Alberto Ruiz <aruiz gnome org>]

2010/9/3 Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau gmail com>:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 07:57:44PM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> One downside that you've mentioned earlier is that with this approach,
>> gdk-pixbuf grows a cairo (and thus libX11) dependency.
>> That might inconvenience a few gdk-pixbuf users. But the one I know
>> offhand, librsvg, already has a cairo dependency (via pango) anyway.
>> So, probably not a big problem.
>
> For what it's worth, libgpod has a gdk-pixbuf dependency and no cairo dep,
> and people complain from time to time about that dependency (though that's
> mainly on distros where gdk-pixbuf is in the same package as gtk+, which
> will no longer be the case with gtk3). So I don't know how they will react
> to an additional cairo dep ;)

Well, since currently gdk-pixbuf comes inside Gtk+, and Gtk+ depends
on cairo. In effect, you already depend on cairo.
So in effect, you will have one dependency less, Gtk+. This should
make your dependency-phobic users happy.

> On the other hand, a GdkPixbuf handling more formats than the current one
> would be really useful since for now it's not possible to easily transfer
> pixel data from a GdkPixbuf to a QImage (conversion is needed). Hopefully
> with the additional pixel formats that are suggested here, this will become
> easier.
>
> Christophe
>
> _______________________________________________
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
> gtk-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
>
>



-- 
Un saludo,
Alberto Ruiz