[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Abysmal state of GTK build
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: Abysmal state of GTK build |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Aug 2022 14:27:05 -0500 |
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
> Po Lu [2022-08-21 22:16:04] wrote:
>> Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
>>> Most users don't choose the toolkits -- they use whatever the
>>> distribution has configured. And since most of those use a variation on
>>> Gnome Shell, it's natural for the distributions to use the Gtk toolkit
>>> for Emacs.
>> Can't we shout at them to do something else? I've seen the Debian Emacs
>> packager here somewhere.
>
> Indeed, Rob does pay attention to what we say. He also has to pay
> attention to what other people say. We all think we're right.
>
>
> Stefan "using Emacs with Lucid, mostly"
...for some version of "pay attention". I certainly care, but I'm also
often swamped[1], and yes there are competing concerns.
For what it's worth, I don't personally have any strong, principled
stand regarding what the default toolkit should be right now (via "apt
install emacs"). If I recall correctly, I think I may have switched it
to gtk years back when it looked like that was the upstream preference.
Personally, I haven't installed emacs-gtk much in years. I switched to
emacs-lucid nearly exclusively a good while back because I hit the well
known X forwarding bugs back when that was important to me. (I also
turn off menu/tool/scroll bars, so I don't see a lot of the
toolkit-specific bits.)
Also for what it's worth, I am definitely inclined to favor upstream
preferences (in general) when I know what they are, resources
permitting, etc.
[1] ...and while I should be subscribed to emacs-devel, I don't read it
right now; noticed this thread because someone pinged me.
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, (continued)
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Dmitry Gutov, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Stefan Monnier, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build,
Rob Browning <=
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Sean Whitton, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Rob Browning, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Visuwesh, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Sean Whitton, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/21
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Jean Louis, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Tim Cross, 2022/08/22
- Re: Abysmal state of GTK build, Po Lu, 2022/08/22