GTK+ port to AmigaOS

Mea culpa. You are right of course. I was thinking of AbiWord for some reason. :oops:

AbiWord has different toolkit backends. The engine is split away from the GUI. Write a wrapper for MUI or Reaction and done.

greetings,

oGALAXYo

[chris]

No, it's GTK2.  It will probably end up as OS4 only.  If you want to help out contact hnl_dk.

Chris

[Kronos]

@chris

Well hnl_dk told me some weeks ago (in PMs) it would only be 1.x, due to
2.0 being to hard to port. Would be good news if that has changed AND if
it doesn't follow the advices layed out in my sig  :-o  :-P  :-D

"OS4-only" doesn't really mean anything when we aretalking bout GPLed SW.

[hnl_dk]

Kronos wrote:
@chris

Well hnl_dk told me some weeks ago (in PMs) it would only be 1.x, due to
2.0 being to hard to port. Would be good news if that has changed AND if
it doesn't follow the advices layed out in my sig  :-o  :-P  :-D

"OS4-only" doesn't really mean anything when we aretalking bout GPLed SW.

Hi' Kronos

our PM was some weeks before I got member of the team (Emmanuel began the project in december - I was member number two joining in february).
We are working on glib-2.4.0 leading towards gtk+.

Right now am I updating GG so I/we could compile on AmigaOS 3.x - about pkgconfig do I have pkgconfig-0.15.0 running on my computer, am going to upload it ASAP.

[hnl_dk]

Kronos wrote:
...

"OS4-only" doesn't really mean anything when we aretalking bout GPLed SW.

You are right - this means only that we are going to work on the Amiga OS 4 version, there would be no block for someone else to use our port to port it for other OS, but as it will use Amiga OS 4.0 specific API, it will not only be ./configure && make && make install :juggler:

[bhoggett]

@Kronos

"OS4-only" doesn't really mean anything when we aretalking bout GPLed SW.

It does if you wrap it round Reaction, for instance. GTK+ has always been GPLed, but we haven't had any ports yet. With the one in progress confirmed as AOS4 only, it follows that it is only of interest to committed Red users and developers.

Anyone interested in cross-platform development will have to look elsewhere, as this will not be of any use to them.

[asian1]

>GTK Apps.

Hello
What about Dillo, lightweight GTK graphic browser? (300 Kbytes).

Is it better to abandon the AmigaOS kernel and use modern BSD / Linux 64 bit kernel?
Perhaps Workbench and various major Amiga apps can be ported to BSD / Linux 64 bit.

[bhoggett]

oGALAXYo wrote:

Mea culpa. You are right of course. I was thinking of AbiWord for some reason. :oops:

AbiWord has different Toolkit backends. The engine is split away from the GUI. Write a wrapper for MUI or Reaction and done.

I know. But AbiWord uses GTK on Linux, which is what I meant. Otherwise, what I said is pretty much the same as what you did, except you did it better.  :-D

[Rogue]

@bhogget:

With the one in progress confirmed as AOS4 only, it follows that it is only of interest to committed Red users and developers.

That's such a nice way to put things. "commited Red users". Why the need to make a "red vs. blue" thing out of this again?

Anyone interested in cross-platform development will have to look elsewhere, as this will not be of any use to them.

As you pointed out yourself, GTK has been GPL for ages and has been around for anyone to port. If there where someone doing e.g. an AROS port, would you equally slander the effort?

[Kronos]

[bhoggett]

Rogue wrote:
@bhogget:
That's such a nice way to put things. "commited Red users". Why the need to make a "red vs. blue" thing out of this again?

You are reading too much into it. I simply use "Red" as shorthand for those who are committed only to AmigaOS4/AmigaOne.

As you pointed out yourself, GTK has been GPL for ages and has been around for anyone to port. If there where someone doing e.g. an AROS port, would you equally slander the effort?

Slander?  :-?

What slander? I am simply saying that it will be of no interest to those whose primary interest is cross-platform development, as opposed to those whose interest is porting applications to AmigaOS4.

Why so oversensitive about everything?  :-(

EDIT: If someone would be doing an AROS port, they'd (presumably) wrap it around Zune, which would (presumably) make it MUI compatible. Theoretically, such a project would be easy to make available across the entire Amiga community. The AmigaOS4 port will only be of use to AmigaOS4/AmigaOne users and developers. Period.

That's not to say the team have any obligations to anyone outside the Red community, but it's a factor that will be taken into account when discussed on neutral forums like Amiga.org.

[Karlos]

@bhogget

I think Rogue meant that phrases like "commited red users" are inflamatory, no matter what your intended meaning. Someone will invariably start another red v blue flamefest.

And seriously, who can be ars*d with another one of those?

If an AOS4 port was made, based on reaction, sure it would be AOS4 only. If a port was made to MUI it would be MOS (and probably with some tweaks AROS) compatible. If a zune port were made then it could be made cross platform.

People will argue each way about the best route to take, missing the point that it doesn't actually matter. If someone did an AOS4/Reaction based one, you can bet someone else would soon get to work a Zune/MUI version so as not to be left behind.

For all their technical differences, MUI/Zune and Reaction fundamentally similar enough for a code rework from one port to the other, as long as the initial port doesn't go totally out of it's way to be badly written and keep dependencies where they belong.

As long as these ports support a common set of the GTK standard, what difference does it actually make? A GTK app recompiled for AOS4 ends up using reaction, the same source recompiled for AROS or MOS uses Zune. Do we care, as long as the ability to port that software exists?

[bhoggett]

Karlos wrote:
I think Rogue meant that phrases like "commited red users" are inflamatory, no matter what your intended meaning. Someone will invariably start another red v blue flamefest.

Someone like that will start one no matter what is said, or the meaning behind it. If we moderate everything we say for the sake of not offending anyone or not offering any remote opportunity for the trolls to pick up on, then there will be nothing to discuss at all.

And seriously, who can be ars*d with another one of those?

Not me. I'd have to point out that flamefests are not only started by trolls, but also by those who seek to take offense at every opportunity. I know certain people will always take offense at something I say, because they choose to interpret it that way no matter how I intend it.

If an AOS4 port was made, based on reaction, sure it would be AOS4 only. If a port was made to MUI it would be MOS (and probably with some tweaks AROS) compatible. If a zune port were made then it could be made cross platform.

People will argue each way about the best route to take, missing the point that it doesn't actually matter. If someone did an AOS4/Reaction based one, you can bet someone else would soon get to work a Zune/MUI version so as not to be left behind.

Possibly, but that's pure speculation.

For all their technical differences, MUI/Zune and Reaction fundamentally similar enough for a code rework from one port to the other, as long as the initial port doesn't go totally out of it's way to be badly written and keep dependencies where they belong.

Well, if you port something purely for the benefit of one platform, there is no reason to expect host API dependencies to be kept to a minimum.

As long as these ports support a common set of the GTK standard, what difference does it actually make? A GTK app recompiled for AOS4 ends up using reaction, the same source recompiled for AROS or MOS uses Zune. Do we care, as long as the ability to port that software exists?

Yes, except that those ports don't exist, and only one is even being planned. Until that changes, there is no way GTK can be viewed as a cross-platform option for Amiga developers (using "Amiga developers" in the generic sense).

(You see, I prefer to use "Red" and "Blue" as shorthand for AmigaOS4/AmigaOne and MorphOS/Pegasos, and "Amiga" as a generic term applicable to all Amiga-like platforms, including the "Classic". Otherwise, I'd have to specify every time I say "Amiga", lest people think I'm referring to the branded solution only)

As long as these ports support a common set of the GTK standard, what difference does it actually make? A GTK app recompiled for AOS4 ends up using reaction, the same source recompiled for AROS or MOS uses Zune. Do we care, as long as the ability to port that software exists?

Aeh excuse me.....

.......did I understand you right ? When porting GTK+ to AOS4 it then will use Reaction as interface. E.g. when compiling an GTK+ app then it will use Reaction ?

Sorry but assuming myself to have understand exactly this then you are wrong. You can't port GTK+ to use Reaction as widgets. This would be plain stupid and probably will not work satisfying enough. GTK+ already is a widgetset of it's own with own style, own layout own adjustment and internal concepts. GTK+ as port will exactly look and operate as GTK+ and not as Reaction or something else. This is more for wxWindows who tries to offer native solutions for each individual system.

You may try to write a GTK+ -> Reaction or GTK+ -> MUI wrapper for each functioncall that GTK+ offers but then compiling a GTK+ app using these wrappers will most likely look like crap because of different layout rules or maybe because the widgets inside native GTK+ will behave differently than the MUI or Reaction alternatives. Not to mention that you most likely won't find matching widgets on either MUI or Reaction as they are being offered in GTK+

Not to speak about Drag & Drop here, the GtkTree Model, things like GtkExpander and much more even hard complex stuff.

No, a probably port will look as follows:

a) porting glib, atk, pango, freetype2, fontconfig
b) keeping GTK+ as is and only port GDK to the Amiga architecture and then compile GTK+ ontop of that GDK changes.

Everything else is overkill and a matter of being canceled before even started. Instead wasting resources for exactly doing this you'd better head off porting the few GTK+ apps as such to use native toolkits on Amiga MUI or Reaction or even better re-write the application from scratch or search for an Amiga solution that you can continue hacking on.

greetings,

oGALAXYo

[Karlos]

Relax dude, you will live longer :lol:

I was merely speculating on the points already made. It has been said by various other people that an AOS4 port would *only* be useful for OS4 and that a MUI/Zune port would run on all amigaos implememntations.

Correct me if I am wrong, but mentioning MUI/Zune and OS4 (and by inference Reaction), this carries the automatic implication of wrapping the GTK+ API around these GUI systems. Don't shoot me for pointing out that were one existing gui system wrapped, the others would be feasable :-P

If, as you suggest, the port would completely keep GTK+'s own object set without any wrapping around the native amiga GUIs, then the entire existing discussion about a MUI/Zune/Reaction GTK port and their cross-amiga portability is already totally irrelavent.

[falemagn]

If, as you suggest, the port would completely keep GTK+'s own object set without any wrapping around the native amiga GUIs, then the entire existing discussion about a MUI/Zune/Reaction GTK port and their cross-amiga portability is already totally irrelavent.

It is quite irrelevant, indeed. The specificity of the AOS4 port has got nothing to do with MUI/Zune/Reaction, it's got to do with the new way libraries are handled in AOS4, and perhaps some 2d gfx API for compositing, plus some other AOS4 specific stuff that might come handy along the way.