Xdg-list digest, Vol 1 #432 - 11 msgs

Linas Vepstas linas at linas.org
Sun Jul 20 20:54:42 EEST 2003

> From: George Staikos <staikos at kde.org>
> > The more politically charged question then becomes, how about glib ?
>    The g has no stigma problems.  The problem is having 3-4 different 
> implementations of each type of container linked into apps, and even worse, 
> having apps that use all those containers internally.

Hi George,

If one codes in C, then I am not aware of *any* package that does what 
glib does.  Glib is very useful, and there's nothing else like it.  
Really, there isn't ... 

>    If glib has to be required, then it should at least be a sufficiently old 
> version that it is already available in binary form for all the platforms 

Glib has been around for many years; it hasn't changed much 
in 5+ years, except for gaining gobject support.

> libraries that use it, should use it internally and provide C primitives in 
> the public interface.  

Glib primitives are C primitives.  As far as I'm concerned, most of 
glib should be made into an ISO standard and moved into libc.  Most
of it is non-controversial and straighforward.

> Then each desktop can wrap this in their choice of 
> toolkit if desired.  It's not fair to make all desktops use one desktop's 
> toolkit.

Glib is not a desktop tolkit. I've used it in GUI-less servers (running
on machines that don't have X11 or kde or gnome installed on them).  
It's generic, it doesn't use or know about graphics or desktops or 
anything like that.  It just provides some nice containers and 
memory management functions & etc.


pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas at linas.org>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933

More information about the xdg mailing list