Re: [Gtk-osx-devs] GTK-OSX Binary Package

John Ralls wrote:

>> Getting some complaints that the bootstrap through jhbuild is
>> too complex, so what I'm doing is installing just the /opt/gtk.

>> Are you going to be hosting any pre-compiled jhbuild binaries
>> on GTK-OSX's SourceForge ? I don't really want to bundle it...

> No.
> Now I understand why you're whining about a separate bootstrap directory: You don't want to make a bundle. You're being silly, because the bundler pulls off only what the bundle needs from your build prefix and fixes up the rpaths. It's a much better solution than what you're trying to do. Better for your users, who get a nice clickable icon in Finder like they're used to, and better for you because instead of fighting the way the system wants to work you're letting it work for you.

That would have worked if it was just an application or two,
instead of a bunch of small programs expecting to run PyGTK ?

It might still be done with the consolidation of those small
programs into a larger "0install" binary (with matching GUI),
but I don't see why you couldn't offer a binary installation.
Even if it's just for developers to bundle libraries from...

Both the MacOSX/Quartz and Darwin/X11 versions _are_ working
just fine, the only tedium was doing the initial bootstrap ?

But it's not ready for the casual Finder user just yet, and
to be honest I'm not sure if GTK+ will be "enough" for them
- or if it must be ported to Cocoa first (by using wxPython)
Or perhaps even rewritten altogether, like the .NET version.

> The only catch is if your app needs dbus (usually because of GConf). In that case you have to make a link to the bundle's Resources folder from your build prefix. I've settled on using /Library/Appname, because /opt requires authentication even if the user is an Admin.

It's not important that it was using /opt/gtk for convenience.
It could have been made relocatable to another prefix, as well.

And I don't understand the hostility ("whining", "silly") here.
Just thought that it could be _useful_ to have a GTK+ stack for
Mac OS X, just like one is available for Windows from ?
Even if real Mac OS X apps would bundle stuff inside the .app.

Like these quotes from

"The packages here are for people who develop software that uses GTK+. This page is not intended directly for end-users. It is expected that people who build installers for GTK+ applications for Windows bundle GTK+ with them."

"If you find choosing, downloading and unpacking the individual zip archives below a chore, there are all-in-one bundles of the GTK+ stack including 3rd-party dependencies, both of GTK+ 2.16 and 2.22. The bundles contain both run-time and developer files. Many of the developer files are relatively irrelevant. If you intend to redistribute the GTK+ run-time, you need to figure out which files you can leave out yourself."

So I was using jhbuild to do something similar for Mac OS X...


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