Gnome 2.8

h3k h3k h3knix at gmail.com
Mon Dec 20 10:01:19 PST 2004


gtk 2.6 is pretty solid, but when i built gnome 2.8.1 on lfs I ran
into some issues that were just with gnome. For some reason, the icons
weren't right, I had to link ~/.icons to the gnome icons folder before
the icons in nautilus or the panels would show up right since i put
gnome in /opt.


On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 08:25:30 -0700 (MST), dperkins at techangle.com
<dperkins at techangle.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2004-12-19 at 10:46 -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> >> linux at nplinux.org wrote:
> >> > ok.. that's great...
> >> >
> >> > what do u suggest?.
> >> >
> >> > clean build of gnome 2.8 or builing 2.6 and then upgrade to 2.8..
> >>
> >> Definitely just install 2.8 without building any 2.6. Only thing is
> >> you said you started with a BLFS-5.1 base. If you've installed many
> >> of the GTK packages (glib, gtk+, pango, atk, etc) from the BLFS-5.1
> >> versions, you may* have trouble with GNOME-2.8. You should seriously
> >> consider using the unstable branch of BLFS for all your GNOME related
> >> packages.
> >>
> >> * - I don't really know, but I do know GNOME development moves quickly
> >> and they may require recent GTK packages.
> >
> > 2.8 requires glib and gtk+ 2.4.x, and whatever the equivalent generation
> > for pango and atk are. From the sound of it, it's safe to go with the
> > new 2.6 releases, which are supposed to be 100% source and binary
> > compatible.
> >
> > Simon.
> > --
> > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
> > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
> > Unsubscribe: See the above information page
> 
> I tried the new Gtk+-2.6 yesterday morning.  I haven't seen any problems
> so far.
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>



More information about the blfs-support mailing list