pierre.labastie at neuf.fr
Thu Mar 10 02:28:20 PST 2016
On 09/03/2016 22:47, Paul Rogers wrote:
>> Paul, I think that this has spiralled a little bit: ISTM that there was
> And refuses to get back on track.
>> an initial sidelight-remark apparent conflation of lightweight-DE with
>> lightweight-programs; which of course is a not necessarily true (er,
>> 'opposite-of-')dichotomy; e.g. & fwiw, on linux when using x, I use twm,
>> but all sorts of 'heavyweight' programs (as/when ~needed).
> So, let me ask, what is your recommendation about GTK3?
I think it should be clear, although the thread is a little chaotic...
It'd be better to build both GTK+2 and GTK+3. At the present time, there
are applications still needing the former, while others need the latter.
Coming back to your firs post on the subject, I do not understand what
you mean with "and then there's the accompanying glib". One glib fits
all. Anyway, if you are only interested in FF, just FBBG: if you use the
provided mozconfig file with no modification, FF will look for GTK+2,
and you do not need GTK+3. So, as far as your original post is
concerned, the answer is: you do not need GTK+3...
More information about the blfs-support