Re: [Gtk-osx-users] Failure while building gtk+

On 16/09/2010, at 3:03 PM, John Ralls wrote:

> On Sep 15, 2010, at 6:44 PM, Richard Procter wrote:
>> [ snip ]
>> This is where I am tempted to get a little cranky with people
>> responsible for releasing PyGObject but it's hard to believe they'd
>> release  something which did not compile fine for them.
>> (After down-grading gobject-introspection, I built via
>> $ jhbuild build gobject-introspection
>> $ jhbuild buildone pygbject
>> )
>> Note that pygtk-2.16 depends on pygobject >= 2.12.1 according to its
>> README file.
> Don't get cranky with them unless you expect them to test on OSX.  
> The duplicate symbols restriction is in Mach-O and not in ELF.  
> Also, the linker adds an underscore to the front of symbols, so foo  
> in source turns into _foo in the linker, and _foo turns into __foo.

Apologies, I shouldn't haven't expressed my frustration. As I said,  
it's very likely that it works fine for them and I wasn't suggesting  
they'd intentionally release a broken build. Though defining a global  
in a header file does strike me as asking for trouble.

> Are the pygobject folks following the even = stable, odd =  
> development convention? There's only one release of pygobject-2.20  
> in, then they immediately started releasing 2.21.x.  
> Makes me think they're not....

I was going by the release note at  
"PyGobject 2.21.0 has been released, this is an unstable release  
leading to 2.22.0.". Then I read someone commenting on the PyGTK list  

 >>> It really is a shame that there was not a stable release of  
 >>> and PyGtk for so long, so now we are in this situation where the  
 >>> non-pygi release of PyGObject was technically an unstable one. I  
 >>> not like predict we will see a PyGtk release before/around the  
time of
 >>> the last stable Gtk+-2.0 series. daa com au/msg19570.html

> A big part of the problem seems to be that gobject-introspection  
> isn't really stable. Perhaps it's too soon for modulesets-stable to  
> use it. From a Gtk-OSX standpoint, it's useful only for PyGtk... so  
> what do you guys think? Should I pull it and go back to --enable- 
> introspection=no for a while in stable?

That's certainly my impression. I don't feel I know enough to offer a  
sound judgment on whether it should be in -stable or not. Disabling  
the new introspection stuff is fine by me, though. My understanding  
is its the next big thing in GTK bindings and will obviate the need  
for PyGTK and I'm not using it at the moment as far as I am aware.


> Regards,
> John Ralls
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --------
> Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
> and start using them to simplify application deployment and
> accelerate your shift to cloud computing.
> _______________________________________________
> Gtk-osx-users mailing list
> Gtk-osx-users lists sourceforge net

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