Re: Stable cross-platform =?UTF-8?Q?version=3F?=

On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:39:26 -0700, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
I'm new, and I'm willing to work on the issues I'm about to raise, but
I could use some guidance.

We're building a cross-platform app, and it would be nice to be on the
latest "stable" version of GTK+. On the main page, that appears to be
GTK+3.0 with GLib 2.28, *but*:

  - The Windows binary installers still seem to be for GTK+ 2.22.1

If you're referring to the binaries on, then I'll update these to GTK+ 2.24.5 (hopefully) somewhere this week. If you can't
wait they are currently living here:

Building 2.24.6 is on my TODO list (don't seem to have received a
release announcement for this one?). I've volunteered to continue maintenance for these MinGW builds for GTK+ 2.24 only, because there's still loads of software out there that depend on the way things are done in these builds.

But if you're starting a new project, maybe it's best to read the
following paragraphs:

There are also other options. For example there's a treasure trove of
both 32 and 64 bit Windows binaries built by the Open Build Service here:

And an automated download script here:

  - GTKMM binary installers are similarly out of date
  - There seem to be build problems on OS X Lion

Can't help you with these, sorry.

These facts are disheartening, since they raise questions about
whether the non-Linux platforms are being maintained.

There are very few people left actively working on the windows port.
But recently it looks like more people are starting to realize
GTK+ needs all the help it can get. As a result various bugfixes
for GTK+ 2.24 are being worked on. I'm very interested in forward
porting these fixes to GTK+ 3 (and I'm sure others are too), but
properly testing these things take time.

Here are my immediate questions:

1. For people doing cross-platform work, which branch should be viewed
as "current-stable", in the sense that it is current and stable
 **and available on all platforms**?

I'd say if current efforts continue GTK+ 2.24. If all our patches
get rejected (not likely, but you never know) 2.16 is still the most
stable/functional/bugfree branch on Windows.

2. Should we give up on the binary packages and work from source?

I you truly plan on contributing (as I said, we need all the help
we can get with the Windows port!), having a source tree around
is inevitable.

3. Why don't GTK+ 3 binary and dev packages exist for Windows? Are
people just being conservative about moving forward from GTK+ 2.22?
Too much to do with limited time? Lack of interest?
4. What is the significance of GDK-Quartz? Can GTK+ be used
practically given it's current state?

GTK+ 3 in it's current state is barely usable on Windows. OBS provides
builds (see links above) for 3.0.12, so you could start having a look

If it's just that the packages haven't been built yet, I might be
willing to volunteer, and I'd *certainly* be willing to write up a
refreshed "getting started" note for people who are trying to work

There's been huge discussion on gtk-devel-list last week. Including
what to do with the win32/64 pages on You might want to
catch up and read the archives:

There's also a lot of information on the wiki:

We've also recently asked and received a new mailing list for windows
related development that's not limited to GTK+ alone but intended
to be a friendly place for hackers interested in development of all
components that are part of the GNOME Platform:

Also, feel free to join #win32 on It's a bit too
silent in there lately!

Hope this helps,

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