X-Rcpt-Trace: gkrellm at lists.netservicesgroup.com
Received-SPF: none (No spf1 record for (aya.yale.edu) ) client-ip=209.85.222.180; envelope-from=<ostroffjh@aya.yale.edu>; x-ip-name=mail-qk1-f180.google_com;
X-Received: from mail-qk1-f180.google.com (unverified [209.85.222.180])
by mailproc.sbbsnet.net (Network-Services-Group-Email) with ESMTP (TLS) id 972643-1928206
for <gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com>; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:57:01 -0500
X-Return-Path: ostroffjh
X-Received: by mail-qk1-f180.google.com with SMTP id k125so198270qkf.0
for <gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com>; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 13:57:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:subject:to:cc:mime-version:references
:in-reply-to:message-id:content-disposition
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=l1KQenmAkItDhu8HKdq0AxfurzJQg2X4P3aXginJ2tA=;
b=7oWWUKxxZF+4vfTgE5ImKInisHtUBtSLNes7qVpVHpZGkDN9Cpe/SrEp/162Dx3+sM
aMU4+rd72xxIBr2qxY91bi0THPQOAN+jBHJ11qp7Mj4ogKrep4uXMxvZBfuVNjwwtkn0
8DxE+u2v4RYKPZp3elHKg4uIO5/lOhgDKZfHjaLsth7izKKINoQ1MTTcfkS/JZs1mF6i
umyy7O5xLhprSEEn/6sJv3BUo47CoFiQDXAAOMK4l88iNUwfo+/ETAwraxnRaNLtNfgi
GGbc9CEFX+RY63tMx0HoORWduNIbfHkS64p5J4p8rBFdYCOgwkLFYdnkrVCfxTtnRF0/
RSeQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531SAgPc9giwm9d7hmcVGeUAunDDaU3rHU0WrYJRIMzpC4/6gEDP
uqOrBoMKtjlASv3ZKMwpNKPLFGZdINwWLg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxUofdvFRWgwWf8IeF9TsTPstOyZmnr/o/3alyIxJGZS5xgkr/VBwNR+0F7kV+CmxZtqEiSdw==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2982:b0:67d:6c77:b427 with SMTP id r2-20020a05620a298200b0067d6c77b427mr2134637qkp.149.1646949418756;
Thu, 10 Mar 2022 13:56:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Return-Path: ostroffjh
X-Received: from ffortso9 (c-76-23-130-96.hsd1.ct.comcast.net. [76.23.130.96])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e7-20020ac85987000000b002e1b7fa2201sm1053599qte.56.2022.03.10.13.56.57
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Thu, 10 Mar 2022 13:56:58 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:56:57 -0500
From: Jack
Subject: [Gkrellm] gtk port Was: On enabling issues at
https://git.srcbox.net/gkrellm/gkrellm
To: gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com
Cc: Bill Wilson <wwilson53@austin.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References:
<CAB4XWXzS03NiRsFMdwJhxDbkDtu-RaHoVjPht44Bg1X-R92TwA@mail.gmail.com>
<edee68ca-b666-08e4-9bfb-b5fa6e2239df@srcbox.net>
<CAB4XWXzqdSuOqVMvXAaAL_QQSJ=yjPNOnY8oEA=L8hmZudu7=w@mail.gmail.com>
<e6fd942a-eb1e-15c3-0be8-f980d343b9d6@srcbox.net>
<20210114152117.2f9777ad6c8f58d24488ded7@austin.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210114152117.2f9777ad6c8f58d24488ded7@austin.rr.com>
X-Mailer: Balsa 2.6.3-real-48-gdb213c65b
Message-Id: <OFZQJTQF.C6LDE5TP.7A3LVP6V@QUAHF653.DOKZQUXP.PZ37LJVL>
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Originating-IP: 209.85.222.180
X-Country: code=US country="United States" ip=209.85.222.180
X-Qnum: 972643
X-ORBS-Accept: dnswl_none
X-Rcpt-To: <gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com>
X-SpamDetect: *********: 9.9 sd=9.9 lv=13.00 nok=0/1 m=1 nf=0 Close 0.04(X-myrbl:Color=white) 0.90(X-Phrase:isspam) 0.26(X-NotAscii:us-ascii) 0.35(From isn't in return path) 0.40(dnswl_none) 0.59(X-Verify-MX present) 0.48(StandardTLD) 0.49(X-Verify-Helo:+OK) 0.50(X-LangGuess:English) Lowered 11.0 Sval 2.4 bsan 11.0 NotSaned s=2.4 was=11.0 Sval 2.4,rx:myrblwhite
X-NotAscii: charset=us-ascii;
X-LangGuess: English
X-Phrase: IsSpam score=1.00
X-Verify-Helo: +OK mail-qk1-f180.google.com
X-Verify-MX: <ostroffjh@aya.yale.edu> senders ip (ch=209.85.222.180 msg=209.85.222.180, net=209.85.) not in mx data dom=aya.yale.edu ipname=mail-qk1-f180.google.com (142.250.152.27 173.194.77.27 173.194.219)
X-Encryption: SSL encrypted
X-MyRbl: Color=White (from rbl) ip=209.85.222.180
X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 0, First 1281, in=737, out=0, spam=0 ip=209.85.222.180
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gkrellm-leave@lists.netservicesgroup.com?subject=unsubscribe>
X-Mailing-List: gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com
List-ID: <gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com>
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: gkrellm@lists.netservicesgroup.com
On 2021.01.14 16:21, Bill Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 18:15:12 +0100 Stefan Gehn
> <stefan+gkrellm@srcbox.net> wrote:
[snip....]
>> One ticket I could immediately think of myself is the port to Gtk+
>> 3/4 which will be inevitable at some point (hey, it survived the
>> port from Gtk+ 1 to 2 too).
>
> It's OK with me. Gtk4 says it "deemphasizes" gdk-pixbuf. At the
> point it becomes deprecated it will be an issue where "porting"
> really means a major rewrite. I don't know what will happen then.
Has there been any activity on this at all? Might it be worth porting
to gtk3/4 without touching the gdk-pixbuf stuff. That would at lest
change the dependency away from gtk2. Do I interpret the previous
comment correctly that that should not be particularly difficult, or is
that just overly simplistic/naive?
Jack
|