Integrating GFC into Xfce

Danny Milosavljevic danny.milo at
Wed Oct 13 08:26:53 CEST 2004


Am Dienstag, den 12.10.2004, 21:53 -0700 schrieb Brian J. Tarricone:
> Jeff Franks wrote:
> > Can I use the current GFC scheme (same as gtkmm)  which uses the 
> > <major + minor> version numbers as a suffix.
> >
> > $includedir/xfce4/xfc-4.4/xfc/... for the header files
> >
> > and
> >
> > xfccore-4.4.pc and xfcui-4.4.pc
> >
> > then in Xfce 4.6 it could be
> >
> > $includedir/xfce4/xfc-4.6/xfc/... for the header files
> >
> > and
> >
> > xfccore-4.6.pc and xfcui-4.6.pc
> i'd prefer it if you didn't.  i don't really see the point.  for one 
> thing, if the libraries aren't versioned such that you can keep 4.4, 
> 4.6, etc. in parallel, this isn't useful at all, and could cause 
> problems.  secondly, we won't be breaking binary (or source) compat 
> until 5.0, so there's no need to keep around older headers.

Beware. It is C++ we are talking about. Binary compability will be
broken on each and every occassion anything is changed in the gfc class
interfaces. (more so if a "virtual" function is added/removed/changed)
And I'd think adding a virtual function (a overridable method for a new
signal, for example) is pretty common to do in a GUI binding.

So I do think that keeping and distinguishing seperate versions on the
same machine is required because of that.

But Jeff should know better than me since I didn't touch C++ in ages ;)

[visual c++ really makes sure one doesn't want to use it again, and
since I learned it with that... you know ;)]


-- key id A334AEA6

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <>

More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list