Re: glib support for (classic) MacOS

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


giles ashlu bc ca
Have you noticed you never see a pro-nuclear vampire?

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