gtk2 ?!?!?!!

Abaddon · 2005-02-16 11:12:15

Besides, you should give GTK apps a shot once in a while, you're hiding yourself from some awesome programs man.

If I don't use them, don't you think that I don't need them?

I wonder what people have against GLIB/GTK and gnome and every package that depends on a small lib of those...

GTK2 is *big* library. Moreover, I *do not* need it to enything.

If you don't like it, then install an old distro like Debian potato and go play with XFree86 3.3.6 and pure xlib programming, in the days where they didn't have gtk2.

I'm using arch because of bleeding edge apps (this is one of reasons). I dunno if you're as dumb that you don't see that your advice is completely useless...

JGC · 2005-02-16 13:10:24

Abaddon wrote:

Besides, you should give GTK apps a shot once in a while, you're hiding yourself from some awesome programs man.
If I don't use them, don't you think that I don't need them?
I wonder what people have against GLIB/GTK and gnome and every package that depends on a small lib of those...
GTK2 is *big* library. Moreover, I *do not* need it to enything.
If you don't like it, then install an old distro like Debian potato and go play with XFree86 3.3.6 and pure xlib programming, in the days where they didn't have gtk2.
I'm using arch because of bleeding edge apps (this is one of reasons). I dunno if you're as dumb that you don't see that your advice is completely useless...

I'm getting sick of all those people always complaining about things getting bloated, etc. A while ago cairo support was announced for the next GTK version, people complaining about 3 extra dependencies added, that it becomes bloated and slow and that their poor buildbox has to compile 3 additional packages... Why not revert to xlib then if you hate new things so much.

About gtk2 that's huge: it is, and it's caused by the shitty docs included that I want to get rid of (23MB). You can rm -rf /usr/share/gtk-doc for example, unless you want to do some gtk programming and use devhelp a lot.

dp · 2005-02-16 13:35:31

JGC wrote:

About gtk2 that's huge: it is, and it's caused by the shitty docs included that I want to get rid of (23MB). You can rm -rf /usr/share/gtk-doc for example, unless you want to do some gtk programming and use devhelp a lot.

suggestion for a splitt-up into

gtk2

and

gtk2-docs

miqorz · 2005-02-16 15:21:19

dp wrote:

JGC wrote:
About gtk2 that's huge: it is, and it's caused by the shitty docs included that I want to get rid of (23MB). You can rm -rf /usr/share/gtk-doc for example, unless you want to do some gtk programming and use devhelp a lot.
suggestion for a splitt-up into
gtk2
and
gtk2-docs

Hell no, This isn't Debian..

I agree with keeping packages as the original author(s) intended them to be.

skoal · 2005-02-16 17:03:47

For the record, I use gtk2. In case there was any misunderstanding, my post was intended to help him manage custom packages, and how pacman would respond for his particular scenario.

rose · 2005-02-16 17:26:40

miqorz wrote:

dp wrote:
JGC wrote:
About gtk2 that's huge: it is, and it's caused by the shitty docs included that I want to get rid of (23MB). You can rm -rf /usr/share/gtk-doc for example, unless you want to do some gtk programming and use devhelp a lot.
suggestion for a splitt-up into
gtk2
and
gtk2-docs
Hell no, This isn't Debian..
I agree with keeping packages as the original author(s) intended them to be.

Is gtk-doc any different from info? Arch doesn't install info (which original author(s) intended to be installed). Why does it install gtk-doc? And why does it install man pages? Arch is not for newbies - all documentation should be stripped. You can find the info in books, in the internet and on arch's wiki and forums.

Dusty · 2005-02-16 17:41:01

I agree that this information should be stripped from the gtk2 and other packages that have documentation here. On my system:

dusty:~ $ ls /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/
atk         glib     gtk       libgimpbase   libgimpmodule   pango
gdk         gobject  gtkspell  libgimpcolor  libgimpthumb
gdk-pixbuf  gsf      libgimp   libgimpmath   libgimpwidgets

and

dusty:~ $ du -hs /usr/share/gtk-doc/
24M     /usr/share/gtk-doc/

Bug report here:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/index.php?do=details&id=2218

Dusty

Abaddon · 2005-02-16 18:03:55

I'm getting sick of all those people always complaining about things getting bloated, etc. A while ago cairo support was announced for the next GTK version, people complaining about 3 extra dependencies added, that it becomes bloated and slow and that their poor buildbox has to compile 3 additional packages... Why not revert to xlib then if you hate new things so much.

Uhm, It doesn't matter, because gtk2 is slow right now

(btw. I don't care about number of dependencies, but with my small hdd I want to get rid of all things which I do not need. You should understand that...).

dp · 2005-02-16 18:36:52

Abaddon wrote:

I'm getting sick of all those people always complaining about things getting bloated, etc. A while ago cairo support was announced for the next GTK version, people complaining about 3 extra dependencies added, that it becomes bloated and slow and that their poor buildbox has to compile 3 additional packages... Why not revert to xlib then if you hate new things so much.
Uhm, It doesn't matter, because gtk2 is slow right now
(btw. I don't care about number of dependencies, but with my small hdd I want to get rid of all things which I do not need. You should understand that...).

i fully understand what you mean - but gtk2 is (in my eyes) the most usefull lib for gui's (together with pygtk of course) ... the whole xfce4 builds on gtk2

miqorz · 2005-02-16 19:00:56

He cares about size, but uses KDE.

Pardon me while I laugh my ass off.

Abaddon · 2005-02-16 20:12:20

He cares about size, but uses KDE.
Pardon me while I laugh my ass off.

My hdd is big enought to have kde and all the apps that I need, but it doesn't have space for additional (for example: gtk2) things.

Wrong:
I dunno if you're as dumb that you don't see that your advice is completely useless...
Right:
I duh know if you're so dumb that you don't see that your advice is completely useless...

Sorry, and thank you.

I was wondering if I shoud use "so"

I've been learning english seriously for two years, only in school. Try to learn polish in two years, doesn't matter where ;p

Dusty · 2005-02-16 20:50:55

Guys, I've deleted some pointless posts, try to be a bit more open minded here! Abaddon has the right to not want gtk2 installed, whether he has good reasons or not, so these don't need to be discussed. Has the original problem been solved?

Dusty

dtw · 2005-02-22 10:48:18

dude - i am ALL for getting rid of 24Mb of crap i never knew existed! It should be stripped in-line with the info rules

Arch Linux

#26 2005-02-16 11:12:15

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#27 2005-02-16 13:10:24

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#28 2005-02-16 13:35:31

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#29 2005-02-16 15:21:19

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#30 2005-02-16 17:03:47

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#31 2005-02-16 17:26:40

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#32 2005-02-16 17:41:01

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#33 2005-02-16 18:03:55

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#34 2005-02-16 18:36:52

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#35 2005-02-16 19:00:56

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#36 2005-02-16 20:12:20

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#37 2005-02-16 20:50:55

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

#38 2005-02-22 10:48:18

Re: gtk2 ?!?!?!!

Board footer