Re: gtkmm, cairo, and XLib

[Jonathon Jongsma <jonathon jongsma gmail com>]

On 1/24/06, Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 23:25 -0800, halbtaxabo-debml yahoo com wrote:
> > Bite the bullet. Get X.h and Xlib.h fixed, then
> > announce that the current version of gtkmm depends
> > on the whatever version of X has the fixes.
>
> I agree. I had meant to suggest that to Jim Gettys when we discussed
> this on the cairo list.
>
> If we can't get that fixed then we may have to hide the cairo headers from the cairomm headers. We probably want to do that anyway.

I definitely agree that these are caused by stupidness in XLib, but
even if XLib gets fixed, is there any precedence for gtkmm (or gtk+)
depending on the newest version of X?  I figured we'd want to avoid a
hard requirement on a brand new version if possible.

But if it's acceptable to depend on a new version of X, how do we go
about getting XLib fixed?  Do they use freedesktop.org bugzilla?

Fortunately this issue only affects us if we try to use a raw XLib
surface with gtkmm, which should be a very rare situation (most of the
time when drawing with cairo in gtkmm, we'll get the surface/context
from gtk instead of creating an XLib surface directly).  So Murray's
latest changes to cairomm (splitting out the xlib surface to a
separate header), should solve the vast majority of the issues.

Jonner