Re: Pure GTK vs Gnome

[John K Luebs <jkluebs luebsphoto com>]

On Sat, Apr 03, 2004 at 09:12:19PM +0200, Iago Rubio wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-04-03 at 19:30, Christopher Fairbairn wrote:
> > I'm aware of the fact that just because a package has "gnome" in it's
> > name doesn't mean it won't work with out Gnome. Although it's not a very
> > good example, I am intending to use some contents of libegg as the bits
> > I desire only depend upon GTK+.
> >
> > I think the best way for me to develop my app is as a straight GTK+
> > application, using libgnomecavnas for it's graphical content
> > presentation.
>
> Not sure why you need libgnomecanvas, but it has it's dependencies:
>
> Depends on libglade, that dependes on libgnome and libgnomeui that
> depends on libgnomevfs-2, that depends on libORBit, libbonobo and
> libbonobo-activation, and so on ....
>
> So libgnomecanvas requires almost the whole gnome.

No, that's wrong.

libglade does not have a hard dependency on libgnome or libgnomeui, and
libgnomecanvas certainly does not require a GNOME capable libglade.

Dependency issues are a little more complex than just reading the output
of ldd.

To repeat, gnomecanvas works well on win32.

> Is not enought gtkdrawingarea, for your requeriments ?
> http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/GtkDrawingArea.html
> http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gdk/gdk-Drawing-Primitives.html#GdkDrawable

GtkDrawingArea and gnomecanvas are not the comparable at all;
one amounts to GTK wrapper around an OS Window, and the latter is
a high level drawing object kit.
Using the former when you need the latter requires you to reimplement the
functionality of the latter anyways. Seems pointless to me.