Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Beans
    2,893
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

    Quote Originally Posted by cb951303 View Post
    unfortunately, programming-wise, that's not how it works. if you want to use gconf you need to compile your application against gconf libraries and that's what a dependency is.
    Not entirely true. You can introduce a new run-time dependency without building against a library at all. See dlopen for information. It's handy in Python, for example, when using a C library that doesn't have a Python counterpart. Wikipedian example:
    Code:
    void* sdl_library = dlopen("libSDL.so", RTLD_LAZY);
    if(sdl_library == NULL) {
       // report error ...
    } else {
       // use the result in a call to dlsym
    }
    So, technically, Pidgin, Firefox, or any other application could check for the existence of the GConf library, and if it exists, dlopen it and do what's needed. If it doesn't, they could fall back to something else.
    Last edited by jpeddicord; January 17th, 2010 at 11:10 PM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Beans
    359

    Re: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

    Quote Originally Posted by Xbehave View Post
    2) what is wrong with having gnome dependencies, it's muuuch better than somebody reinventing the wheel every, especially if these are non-gui dependencies.
    GNOME is the bloatest thing ever for a normal working system.
    But hey, lets hope all your favorite apps get tied down to BLOTGNOME and lags to death.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Beans
    217

    Re: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    GNOME is the bloatest thing ever for a normal working system.
    But hey, lets hope all your favorite apps get tied down to BLOTGNOME and lags to death.
    A nice rational argument about why not to use gconf, because GNOME is "bloated". I could explain that the whole point of seperate libraries is that you can pull in parts of the functionality without the "bloat" of the rest of gnome, but I doubt you care as you probably consider everything that uses more than 64k "bloat".

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    0000:0400
    Beans
    Hidden!

    Re: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

    Quote Originally Posted by del_diablo View Post
    GNOME is the bloatest thing ever for a normal working system.
    But hey, lets hope all your favorite apps get tied down to BLOTGNOME and lags to death.
    So, what do you use? DWM? Rat Poison? XMonad? Screen? Did you post this from elinks?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Tuxland
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Pidgin Shouldn't Require GConf...

    Quote Originally Posted by steeleyuk View Post
    Just what everybody wants, to have to enter the same proxy information into several different apps...

    It would be better if Firefox read the proxy information from gconf as well. Same goes for reading the information from KDE, XFCE, etc.
    I smell a new freedesktop.org standard.
    Proud GNU/Linux zealot and lover of penguins
    "Value your freedom or you will lose it, teaches history." --Richard Stallman

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •