where is gtk 1 support ?
maoz...@gmail.com
all rot in hell.
Mike Beltzner
> You purebred ignorant spastic assholes. This is too much. I hope you
> all rot in hell.
Wow. And I thought it was bad when people clamoring for GTK 2 support
were calling us *inbred* ignorant spastic assholes.
cheers,
mike
Tony Mechelynck
> You purebred ignorant spastic assholes. This is too much. I hope you
> all rot in hell.
1. You'll get nowhere by insulting people. An apology is in order.
2. GTK1 isn't supported anymore, not even by the GTK/Gnome guys themselves.
The only GTK bugs getting fixed these days are in GTK2.
Worst regards,
Tony.
--
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not
certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
-- Albert Einstein
maoz...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> 1. You'll get nowhere by insulting people. An apology is in order.
Go to hell. You have just disenfranchised anyone running on a
processor slower than 1 ghz. So much for cross-platform. So much for
community. So much for all the nonsense I see printed on your website.
All garbage and lies.
> 2. GTK1 isn't supported anymore, not even by the GTK/Gnome guys themselves.
> The only GTK bugs getting fixed these days are in GTK2.
So what ? You claim to be developers so fix any bugs that become
problems. Gtk2 makes this browser entirely useless for an entire class
of people. If you want to be Internet Explorer, then just say so. Get
a job in Redmond. As it is, there is absolutely no purpose for this
browser. Apple has a better answer for their o.s., Microsoft has a
better answer for Windows. That leaves "meaningless" as the best
description for this piece of useless trash.
> Worst regards,
> Tony.
No problem. From a person with no brains, sense or ethics, I care
little for what you say. Enjoy your future without the entire
hobbyist community ... but do me a small favor ? take the "cross-
platform" schtick off the website, eh ? Truth in advertising and all
that.
Tony Mechelynck
I am not a developer, just a plain user of Mozilla software. So if anyone has
been disenfranchised, O troll, it's not my fault. <plonk>
--
Women's Libbers are OK. I just wouldn't want my sister to marry one.
John J Barton
(some impolite stuff I need not repeat)
As you appreciate the importance of GTK1, you are the perfect member of
the community to support it.
John.
A.tu....@gmail.com
> On Jan 12, 3:19 am, Tony Mechelynck <antoine.mechely...@belgacom.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> Go to hell. You have just disenfranchised anyone running on a
> processor slower than 1 ghz. So much for cross-platform. So much for
> community. So much for all the nonsense I see printed on your website.
> All garbage and lies.
>
Ha HA! "disenfranchised" ...right. I'm running GTK2 apps on a room
full of old workstations ranging from P2-266MHz to p3-866MHz and they
all run just fine. So I say Kudos to devs for sticking with supported
frameworks.
Also, this is open source, so if you see something not currently
supported that you want supported, the only "productive" thing to do
about it is to put on some big-boy pants and take on the project
yourself. I've rarely seen mudslinging actually solve anything.
Best wishes, and I hope you grow up to become a good developer some
day.
Boris Zbarsky
> Ha HA! "disenfranchised" ...right. I'm running GTK2 apps on a room
> full of old workstations ranging from P2-266MHz to p3-866MHz and they
> all run just fine.
To be honest, changing from GTK1 to GTK2 in the case of Mozilla apps does carry
a serious performance and responsiveness penalty. Menus take much longer to
open, as do windows. Whether this is an issue in GTK2 itself or in the GTK2
widget layer in Gecko or both is unclear.
Now I'm not saying we need to switch back to GTK1, but dismissing out of hand
complaints about the performance of GTK2-based Mozilla is just as silly as the
original post in this thread. What _should_ be happening instead is
investigation into why there is a performance difference. Sadly, the pepole who
know Gecko internals aren't necessarily all that familiar with GTK2 stuff, and
the people familiar with GTK2 not only don't know Gecko internals but also tend
to have the same attitude you seem to: "It's fast enough for this limited set of
uses, so we'll ignore the performance issues that arise in other cases."
> So I say Kudos to devs for sticking with supported frameworks.
Honestly, there's a tradeoff between "supported" and "working" that often seems
to be skewed in the Linux world (that is, things stop being supported before the
things that are supposed to replace them are working). Over my 12 years of
Linux use, this has been the #1 problem I've had with it. So just something
being "the supported way" doesn't necessarily mean it's possible to actually use it.
-Boris
Robert Kaiser
> To be honest, changing from GTK1 to GTK2 in the case of Mozilla apps
> does carry a serious performance and responsiveness penalty. Menus take
> much longer to open, as do windows. Whether this is an issue in GTK2
> itself or in the GTK2 widget layer in Gecko or both is unclear.
Does the performance penalty remain the same when using a theme that
doesn't imitate a native look, like the Modern theme for SeaMonkey?
Our GTK1 never supported moz-appearance/nsITheme stuff, while our GTK2
code does, and I suppose all that code being called can have an impact.
On modern systems, I don't see any perf problems I can feel, but those
modern systems are of course not comparable in speed or memory to a P2
or even P3 system.
Reality is that from what I hear most major Linux distros are striving
hard to not ship GTK1 any more in their upcoming releases, as the most
significant app that has not been migrated to GTK2 is XMMS, which can be
replaced by a growing number of other multimedia applications. So, at
this time it seems that GTK1 is soon going to be only present on legacy
systems - after all, GTK 2.0 has been released in March 2002.
I guess GTK2 might never be as fast as GTK1 was though, as Unicode
support, vastly improved accessibility, themability and font rendering
probably need more memory and processor cycles no matter how efficient
you do the programming.
Robert Kaiser
Boris Zbarsky
> Does the performance penalty remain the same when using a theme that
> doesn't imitate a native look, like the Modern theme for SeaMonkey?
Yes. That's exactly what I use, and responsiveness certainly got worse with the
switch to GTK2 on trunk.
> On modern systems, I don't see any perf problems I can feel, but those
> modern systems are of course not comparable in speed or memory to a P2
> or even P3 system.
Right. I'm using a P3-733.
> Reality is that from what I hear most major Linux distros are striving
> hard to not ship GTK1 any more
I'm not saying we should switch back to GTK1. I'm saying GTK2 has some real
problems.
> I guess GTK2 might never be as fast as GTK1 was though, as Unicode
> support, vastly improved accessibility, themability and font rendering
> probably need more memory and processor cycles no matter how efficient
> you do the programming.
Sure. It's possible to try to make it faster and fail. So far even the trying
hasn't happened.
-Boris
Tony Mechelynck
[...]
> Honestly, there's a tradeoff between "supported" and "working" that
> often seems to be skewed in the Linux world (that is, things stop being
> supported before the things that are supposed to replace them are
> working). Over my 12 years of Linux use, this has been the #1 problem
> I've had with it. So just something being "the supported way" doesn't
> necessarily mean it's possible to actually use it.
>
> -Boris
>
Yeah, I remember a crashing bug in the version of GTK2 installed on openSUSE
10.3. It hasn't crashed me recently in either BonEcho or suiterunner, but that
crash was nonsystematic for me; and the corresponding Novell/SuSE bugzilla
item ( https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=331725 ) was RESOLVED FIXED
then REOPENED so I'm not sure of that bug's actual current status. See also
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=482531 , currently RESOLVED FIXED.
I'm NOT pleading for a return to the "unsupported" GTK1, mind you (let's be
honest, it's getting quite outdated by now), just regretting that "the thing
supposed to replace it" stopped working (for a time) when the latest release
of SuSE Linux came out. But then, there's that old saying that there's only
one kind of bug-free software, namely, obsolete software.
Best regards,
Tony.
--
You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without holding on.
-- Dean Martin
Tony Mechelynck
[...]
> I guess GTK2 might never be as fast as GTK1 was though, as Unicode
> support, vastly improved accessibility, themability and font rendering
> probably need more memory and processor cycles no matter how efficient
> you do the programming.
>
> Robert Kaiser
>
...which again points to a kind of tradeoff: personally I wouldn't want to
forgo Unicode support, and themability and font rendering, though not
primordial, are still important for me; for some other people, accessibility
is primordial, to the point where it's decisive for the usability of a system;
and so on.
Integration might even have advantages: would GTK1 plus appropriate add-ons
for Unicode support, accessibility, themability, font support, etc., still be
faster than GTK2?
Best regards,
Tony.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
237. You tattoo your email address on your forehead.
Robert Kaiser
> Integration might even have advantages: would GTK1 plus appropriate
> add-ons for Unicode support, accessibility, themability, font support,
> etc., still be faster than GTK2?
There are no such "add-ons" for GTK1, and I believe that version
wouldn't even support such "add-ons", as you call them (actually I'm
pretty sure those are changes to the core of the toolkit).
Robert Kaiser
Boris Zbarsky
> I guess GTK2 might never be as fast as GTK1 was though, as Unicode
> support, vastly improved accessibility, themability and font rendering
> probably need more memory and processor cycles no matter how efficient
> you do the programming.
None of the things you listed except maybe themability and font rendering should
require vastly greater amounts of X traffic (which is what I'm seeing here)...
I agree that the way fonts were done might cause that sort of situation, but
that's a problem in the design, not just something that's unavoidable. Windows
and Mac don't suffer from the same issues, for example.
-Boris
Robert Kaiser
Hmm, X traffic is something that should be reduced, I can understand
that. Of course, Windows and Mac don't have a (possibly
network-transparent) X server, so comparison is hard. It sure would be
worth a lot if the GTK team could reduce X traffic, it would help all
consumers.
Robert Kaiser
Boris Zbarsky
> Hmm, X traffic is something that should be reduced, I can understand
> that. Of course, Windows and Mac don't have a (possibly
> network-transparent) X server, so comparison is hard. It sure would be
> worth a lot if the GTK team could reduce X traffic
I didn't say it's a GTK problem per se. It could well be a problem in how we
use GTK2. The code is quite different from GTK1.
-Boris