faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Guillaume on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @01:50
|
You're correct, there aren't that many dependencies. However does including GDK and GLib in KDE really makes sense to you ?
> And just when was the last time you checked?
More than a year ago. But you're right, Raster probably found the time to write a great doc for it while writing imlib2. :-) |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Carsten Pfeiffer on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @02:44
|
Actually you don't need gdk or glib AFAIK. Imlib1 actually consisted of two libraries, one with GDK, one plain Xlib. I used the plain Xlib one.
With Imlib2, I don't even see any GDK at all.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Bernd Gehrmann on Saturday 17/Mar/2001, @08:44
|
Apparently you lost track of the thread :-)
The previous comments were about gdk-pixbuf,
not imlib.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: KuickShow for KDE 2.1
by Guillaume Laurent on Sunday 18/Mar/2001, @03:30
|
Well, no, I actually thought Kirby was still talking about imlib1 :-).
Oh well. That doesn't change much. While I agree that any of imlib[12] or gdk-pixbuf might make sense for an image viewer, using any of them in KDE would be a huge blunder.
There. :-).
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|