Re: Glib resource framework

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt metux de> wrote:
> * Paul Davis <paul linuxaudiosystems com> schrieb:
>> >> the GTK stack in particular cannot be statically linked (certainly not
>> >> without considerable effort).
>> >
>> > Why not, exactly ?
>> because quite a lot of GTK is dynamically loaded even if the basic
> what exactly is loaded dynamically, and why is the necessary ?

* image file format loaders
* font format handling
* theme engines
* various other modules

>> libraries themselves are statically linked. and because the entire
>> stack has a build system that pretty much assumes the the use case is
>> dynamic linkage.
> how exactly ?

try it. you'll see. its been a long time since i wasted time on this.

> I'm not just talking about desktop integration.
> What, eg., with integration with certain system resources,
> daemons, system-wide configuration, etc, etc ?

neither GTK nor any DE needs to do anything about integration with
things that are not part of GTK nor a DE.

>> as an ISV, i'm not really that interested in such things. i don't
>> control nor do i want to control what DE's my users have, and i don't
>> want my app dependent on the sort of concepts that DEs are now moving
>> towards apart from a very limited common subset (e.g. presence in
>> standard lists of applications, icons).
> Sure. Therefore you need some easy way for passing certain information
> to the DE, take for example menu entries or desktop icons.

freedesktop covers all this.

> So, please let's go to the root questions:
> What are the exact problems you're trying to solve with
> binary relocation ?

i don't even know what you mean by this term at present.

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