Re: glib support for (classic) MacOS

[Ralph Giles <giles snow ashlu bc ca>]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Deirdre Saoirse wrote:

> > We're considering using g_module for dynamically loadable driver
> > support in ghostscript. I understand that works fine on win32 and a
> > reasonable assortment of unicies; we'd like to add Classic MacOS
> > support as well, wrapping the Code Fragment Manager.
> 
> God, that would be so excellent!

Would it? :-)

 [...]
> As far as I know, there's no other efforts in progress. Arnaud and I
> started independently; I was hoping that putting the page up on
> sourceforge would combine any efforts rather than diverge them. So far,
> it's been working, but there hasn't been a lot of activity. I update the
> project web pages by this weekend to really reflect what's been done and
> what needs to be done.

That would help.

Justin wrote back independently and suggested I just start fresh, relying
on GUSI (also now on sourceforge) for the POSIX bits. I'll start trying
this weekend when my roommate's iMac is free.

> > We're just interested in glib at this point, but I wanted to avoid
> > duplicating work.
> 
> I think most of the work for glib still needs to be done. I hadn't really
> looked at that part so much as most of my interest was Gtk+ itself (but of
> course glib is a necessary part).
> 
> Given that the gory details of mapping some of the Gtk stuff to internal
> toolbox calls, where necessary, may not be of interest to the gtk list as
> a whole, would it be appropriate to create a glib-mac list (I can do it
> for the gtk-mac project) for people interested in the porting?

I doubt a separate list for glib will be warrented, but a gtk-mac-devel
would help concentrate effort if gtk-list is inappropriate.

I'd appreciate having a place to hold the discussion, anyway.
 
> > Also, is this something that would be interesting for the mainline?
> > Should I make patches against the 1.2 or 1.3 branches as well?
> 
> I think it would be interesting for mainline, but I don't see any need to
> go back to prior versions (than the one we started with anyway). It's
> possible other people may feel differently on that last point. :)

Having it go into the mainline would be an extra incentive, I guess.
Caveat: we're in no way committed at this point. If we go don't go
with it, I'll likely not be around to help maintain the port, and vice
versa.

Thanks,
 -ralph

--
giles ashlu bc ca
Have you noticed you never see a pro-nuclear vampire?
  -- http://www.purrsia.com/freefall/ff200/fv00171.htm