Re: [Bug-gnubg] GNOMEify the user interface?

[Michael Petch]

Come to think of it. You were right it was still X11 based.

Clearly unless we are willing to limit how windows builds are built and
distributed the QT/Windows solution - is not economical, may not be
practical, and windows users would not be able to roll their own Windows
Builds.

But I don't think it is impossible. I can't even see QT being viable
unless Trolltech creates a Free edition on Windows.

Mike 

On Fri, 2004-05-07 at 03:51, Øystein O Johansen wrote:
> > The reason I thought that there was a QT-Free on Windows was
> > that at one time there was a KDE 2.x port (Based on QT)
> > using Cygwin on Windows.
> 
> I remembered that version. It was based on X11, so you had to
> have the following things installed:
> 
> - Cygwin
> - A X11 server
> - QT runtimes
> 
> If we port GNU Backgammon this way we will also need all the
> above things, and that's totally out of the question.
> 
> (I remeber back several years ago, when I first tried porting
> GNU Backgammon to windows. It was before the GTK interface in
> gnubg, and the interface only used X11 (it's still in the ext
> directory of the sources, I remeber I managed to port
> GNU Backgammon with cygwin and an X11 server, but it didn't
> taste very well.)
> 
> -Øystein
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
> intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
> information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
> addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
> this message.
> Thank you.
-- 
Mike Petch
CApp::Sysware Consulting Ltd.
Suite 1002,1140-15th Ave SW.
Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
T2R 1K6.
(403)804-5700.