On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 04:54:28PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
on Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 09:18:27AM +0100, Jeremy Henty wrote:
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 11:37:33AM -0700, Linda J. Laubenheimer wrote:
Oh, well, no Dillo on my thin box.
Why not? Gtk+-2 is designed to work alongside gtk+-1 with no problems. I have had them both installed for a couple of years, running dillo and other gtk+-1 and gtk+-2 applications. It's all worked out of the box with no problems.
Probably because installing GTK1 (and all the associated other bits that it needs, like glib and the legacy X fonts) would take too much disk space. On a modern system you probably aren't going to have any other GTK1-based applications, and it's hard to justify installing those extra things just for Dillo.
Sometimes I wonder why PDAs and handhelds went with GTK2. For instance, in Slackware: PACKAGE NAME: gtk+-1.2.10-i386-3 COMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 1534 K UNCOMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 4420 K PACKAGE NAME: gtk+2-2.4.3-i486-1 COMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 5946 K UNCOMPRESSED PACKAGE SIZE: 26350 K That's 26MB instead of 4MB! And GTK2 is much slower than GTK1 which on low-CPU-power is a problem.
In the Familiar project, we are still using Dillo 0.6.7, because that's the only version that I could find with working GTK2 patches. Some of our target machines have only 16MB of memory, and we'd have to remove a significant amount of other functionality to make space for a GTK1-based Dillo.
The good news, is that after we go FLTK, a statically linked dillo binary could be made. -- Cheers Jorge.-