[ITP-2] glib-2.4.2-1

[Charles Wilson]

Gerrit P. Haase wrote:

>>It's such things that makes some people think GLib is a GNOME 
>>or graphical library and should be avoided at all.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. There are some overlappings though.  But since there are
> already some of the core libraries of the GNOME desktop in /usr we
> should just stay with it.

I support the /opt/gnome2/ (or whatever) idea for gnome libs and apps. 
However, I wouldn't cry -- and would probably support -- the idea of 
NON-gnome libs, which are currently not yet part of cygwin, but which 
gnome uses, to live in /usr.  Like glib, audiofile, etc.

OTOH, gtk+, being a windowing library, could go either way IMO.  If it 
goes in /opt/gnome2/, then later some genius could provide gtk+win which 
could live in /opt/gnome2-win/ and use MSW windowing+cygwin(*) instead 
of X+cygwin. (I assume that the folks behind this gnome-push are 
thinking X-based, right?)  OTO-Other-H, gtk+ != gnome, and there are 
plenty of non-gnome apps that use plain-old-gtk; this mitigates against 
/opt/*.

Good thing I'm not in charge of these decisions, or nothing would get 
done. :-)

(*) note that MSW-windowing+cygwin is *different* from native MSW gtk, 
as used by Tor Lilqvist's native port of gimp.  It's like the fact that 
there are/were THREE distinct builds of XEmacs on windows:
    native MSW XEmacs -- used native windows libs for GUI and runtime
    cygwin-X   XEmacs -- used cygwin-X for GUI, and cygwin runtime
    cygwin-MSW XEmacs -- used native libs for GUI, but cygwin runtime
Note that the XEmacs currently distributed as part of the cygwin package 
is BOTH a build#2 and a build#3, simultaneously.

--
Chuck