Re: getting rid of the HAVE_GNOME define

From: <msevior_at_physics.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Sat Sep 30 2006 - 15:35:17 CEST

>
> Hello,
>
> i have spent some time throwing out bogus HAVE_GNOME optional code and
> implementing fallbacks for missing functionality in the gtk-only
> build. If there are no objections I'll consider replacing the remaing
> ones (that we are not able to get rid off without losing
> functionality) with HAVE_GNOMEVFS, HAVE_BONOBO and HAVE_LIBGNOME
> defines.
>
> At this point the gtk and gnome builds does already offer basically
> the same functionality, the remaining differences are
> + abiwidget bonobo control (-> HAVE_BONOBO)
> + gtk-only build not using gnomeapp, which takes care of initialising
> atk[1] (-> HAVE_LIBGNOME)
> + handling of remote documents, mostly abstracted away by using
> gsf/goffice but some bits remaining (-> HAVE_GNOMEVFS)
>
> [1] might be mislead here
>

Hi Rob,
        This is a nice clean up. Go ahead.

Cheers

Martin

> Cheers,
> Rob
>
Received on Sat Sep 30 15:59:15 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Sep 30 2006 - 15:59:15 CEST