Re: "Lightweight GTK+"?

[Simon Budig <Simon Budig unix-ag uni-siegen de>]

Havoc Pennington (hp redhat com) wrote:
> Simon Budig <Simon Budig unix-ag org> writes: 
> > Is it possible to reduce the size of the GTK Library (we don't have
> > unlimited resources) e.g. by removing some unused widgets?
> 
> You can do a custom GTK build and remove a substantial number of the
> widgets and some other features (e.g. unused image loaders and
> language modules). Static linking will already strip a lot of unused
> stuff of course.

Static linking currently is not a solution, since we have multiple
applications. So - how would I remove widgets from the Build?
Simply deleting the files from the Makefile?

> > Would you recommend to use GTK+ in it's current state?
> 
> For embedded you should also consider simply using a small version of
> X such as the one used for the iPAQ; framebuffer is somewhat smaller
> but not hugely so, and its smaller size is achieved at the expense of
> multiprocess support.

Yeah - we consider this definitely. X11 is not too big and has a lot
of advantages (for example generating synthetic events for a virtual
keyboard). X11 would even enable to use GTK+ 1.2 so that we would have
a rock solid api and the (as Sven mentioned) better GObject performance.

> The primary advantage of GTK for embedded devices is that you get the
> same GUI API as a full-fledged computer, and of course the
> higher-level full-featured nature of that API; GTK will be larger than
> something like FLTK, but will also be a good bit more powerful if you
> can afford the size and need the GTK features or the similarity to the
> non-embedded API. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs. ;-)

Yeah - I tried some coding in FLTK yesterday and it is nice and straight-
forward. But having only one callback and no signals available is -
at least for me - a little bit strange...

Bye,
        Simon
-- 
      Simon Budig unix-ag org       http://www.home.unix-ag.org/simon/