Re: EXTERNAL: Windows Installer for Gtk+3.6.2 and gtkmm-3.6.0

OK, I think I have to talk now. The technical reason behind the lack of "official" GTK+3 Win32 bundle, is that someone needs to provide a reusable and predictible FULL build environment. That means, folks running Win32 must be able to grab a big package containing GTK+3 source with everything needed (MSYS, MinGW, dependencies, a.s.o), install it easily, click on a "build" shortcut and get resulting binaries in a dest folder. And it should adapt to every new GTK+3 release out there, so we can get binaries for each version as time goes by. I made such system. It's not perfect, but well documented and runs natively on Windows XP/Vista/7/8. Everything works. You can see it here :
So, what's the problem ?
Well, we get to the second reason, and it's purely "relational" : there is no official maintainer anymore. That means, no-one which could validate me, or anyone else, to have write access to GTK+ servers and upload bundles. And finding someone to help you is not easy. I tried many ways, this list, IRC...
Well I thought I might get it upstream, but was proven wrong (months ago).
It's very sad.
And I'm glad you're sending this messages Balint because I think it very negatively impacts the GTK+ project and its credibility, just as you do. I spent time to get this build environment running, thought that I could find support, was wrong, and deceptively switched to another projects (currently improving ValaIDE, big release is coming). So I'm sending this ultimate message in a bottle : PLEASE someone validate me, or anyone wanting to contribute, as Win32 maintainer -or at least "bundle provider". Or at least discuss the topic seriously once. Benjamin Otte if you're reading this, GNOME love folks... anyone.
Tarnyko Bálint Réczey writes:
2013/2/17 Paul Davis <paul linuxaudiosystems com>:

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Bálint Réczey <balint balintreczey hu>

Hi Paul,
2013/2/17 Paul Davis <paul linuxaudiosystems com>:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Bálint Réczey <balint balintreczey hu>
> wrote:
>> Unfortunately our efforts are severely impacted by the lack of official
>> GTK+
>> installers for Windows and OS X and this uncertainty was a major reason
>> which
>> brought the Qt port alive.
> I'm not speaking as a representative of the GTK project, but I will note
> that as the lead developer of a large scale app that uses GTK to provide
> portability to Linux, OS X and Windows, it is my judgement that you
> should
> plan to bundle GTK within your application and not rely on it being
On GNU/Linux distributions we rely on the package manager to provide the
GTK libraries and it works perfectly.

There is no package manager on OS X that could do this. MacPorts or Fink
would be the only equivalent, in which case you would need to talk to them
about their plans for GTK3. However, you will likely find that if you ever
need to do development on an OS X system, the presence of packages from
either MacPorts or Fink can make life very, very complex unless it just so
happens that they have the precise versions that you need.
> understanding of things, but on OS X it simply makes a lot more sense to
> cook up a .app bundle with everything your application needs, including
> and really seems to reflects Apple's intentions for 3rd party apps that
> rely
> on additional 3rd party libraries.
Wireshark already provide such bundles at
thus the problem is only not having the GTK3 binaries we could put in
the bundles.

so build it yourself ... what is the problem?
moreover, the nature of GTK is such that you cannot "just" include the
binaries in the bundle and expect stuff to work. GTK (2 and 3) are not
currently "relocatable" except on Windows.
OK, I'm asking specifically for official pre-built _Windows_ binaries. For OS X building GTK seems to be reasonable and well documented.
gtk-list mailing list
gtk-list gnome org

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