| 1 |
Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 07/07/2011 02:06 AM, Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> and/or take the whole mess to -dev... |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> I couldn't care less about gtk stuff - but forcing gtk3 just because - |
| 8 |
>>> and |
| 9 |
>>> that on a package where gtk3 is the worse choice... not a smart move. |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> This sounds like the move KDE made with KDE4. I have some gtk stuff on |
| 13 |
>> here but I'm not sure how much I actually use it. The new version may be |
| 14 |
>> good one day but if it is not ready yet, why not wait until it is? |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> This is not about Gnome though. It's about Gtk. And portage never |
| 17 |
> removed older versions, unlike Qt. Try: |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> eix -e gtk+ |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Hell, there's still version 1.2.10 lurking in there! What are the |
| 22 |
> chances there would be a Qt 1.x in portage? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I didn't mention Gnome. I have some gnome stuff on here but don't use |
| 27 |
the desktop itself. I just made the comparison to KDE3 being dropped |
| 28 |
when it was well known that KDE4 still needed some time to get some |
| 29 |
kinks worked out. From what was posted here, I got the impression that |
| 30 |
gtk2 is being dropped when gtk3 is not . . . well quite ready yet. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Just saying. :/ |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Dale |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
:-) :-) |
Archives