[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Did I just mess up?

From: Holger
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Did I just mess up?
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:16:01 +0200

At 14:53 28.07.2003 +0000, Joern Thyssen wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2003 at 04:10:42PM +0200, Holger wrote
> But on the other hand: in <glib/gutils.h> both
> g_path_get_dirname/g_path_get_basename are defined. Why not use these? Or
> are there really systems left without glib?

I don't know, but the answer is probably yes. On one hand is nice to

OK, more specifically: ... any platform that we want gnubg to compile on.
The answer may still be yes. But as long as I don't see a good counter-example I suppose this must be rather exotic.

ensure that gnubg compiles with any plain vanilla ANSI C compiler on a
minimal system, but on the other hand, it would be nice to use some of
the glib stuff, for example:

So the question arises: Do we want to support the very last system (with only the no-gui version), or bear the chance that gnubg doesn't compile on everything that consists of silicon. At least for the GUI version there's no need to hesitate - GTK+ relies on glib anyway.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]