From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29803 invoked by alias); 10 Apr 2003 17:05:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact guile-gtk-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: guile-gtk-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 29788 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2003 17:05:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO octopussy.utanet.at) (213.90.36.45) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Apr 2003 17:05:44 -0000 Received: from plenty.utanet.at ([213.90.36.9]) by octopussy.utanet.at with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193fUT-00013f-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:05:33 +0200 Received: from dsl-157-95.utaonline.at ([62.218.157.95] helo=rotty-ipv4.yi.org) by plenty.utanet.at with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193fUS-0003q3-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:05:33 +0200 Received: from alice.rhinosaur.lan ([192.168.1.3] ident=mail) by rotty-ipv4.yi.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 193fOU-0000X8-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:59:22 +0200 Received: from andy by alice.rhinosaur.lan with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 193fOU-00032L-00; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:59:22 +0200 To: Stan Pinte Cc: guile-gtk@sources.redhat.com, rlb@defaultvalue.org Subject: Re: (gnome gtk) et al References: <20030407144511.GA1489@lark> <1049743589.1933.21.camel@tosca.elektra.com.mx> <20030408163225.24531f44.stan@altosw.be> <871y0clq2u.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> <20030409170017.0ea1f24f.stan@altosw.be> From: Andreas Rottmann Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:05:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20030409170017.0ea1f24f.stan@altosw.be> Message-ID: <878yuip9ud.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2003-q2/txt/msg00017.txt.bz2 Stan Pinte writes: > On 08 Apr 2003 21:57:45 +0200 > Andreas Rottmann wrote: > > > Stan Pinte writes: > > > > [quote of Ariel, confusing me about wether there is 2.0 porting work > > at all] > > > > > hello, > > > > > > I would really like to start using the gnome-canvas with > > > guile-1.6.3, and guile-gtk-1.2.31 > > > > > > can anyone point me to the easiest way to do it? > > > > > > shall I merge the old sources coming from the gnome-guile project in > > > the Gnome CVS? shall I rewrite a binding from scratch using g-wrap? > > > > > > thanks a lot for guidance, > > > > > I really wonder why so few people seem interested in GTK+ 2.0 > > bindings. I'd love to have Goops-based bindings for 2.0 (OO is really > > nice, if not necessary ;-) when dealing with widget sets IMO), and > > could lend a hand from time to time. > > As well as me, but the question is: someone in the past make a > gnome-canvas binding, that is not working anymore with the current > guile-1.6.3 ... > > --> how can we get that working easely? (in which tree should we add > that stuff) > > If we make a goops binding for the gnome-canvas, it is wonderful, > but I think it comes after the basic functionality, no? > Well, I guess this is about Gnome 1.4. I'm not motivated at all doing anything in this area, sorry. However, I would like to know: * What is the attitude of the g-wrap maintainer/author (Rob Browning) regarding goops-support, and how difficult/invasive would supporting goops be? * Is there a CVS repository of g-wrap? * Why does guile-gobject use it's own version of g-wrap and how does it differ from mainstream? * I guess the core of future wrappers would be a tool that converts .def files to g-wrap modules. Is there code somewhere? Regards, Andy -- Andreas Rottmann | Rotty@ICQ | 118634484@ICQ | a.rottmann@gmx.at http://www.8ung.at/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://www.8ung.at/rotty/gpg.asc Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62 It's GNU/Linux dammit!