After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 135704 - Allow to include some gdk-pixbuf-loaders even with -DUSE_GMODULE
Allow to include some gdk-pixbuf-loaders even with -DUSE_GMODULE
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 354184
Product: gdk-pixbuf
Classification: Platform
Component: general
git master
Other other
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gtk-bugs
gtk-bugs
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2004-02-28 18:46 UTC by Hans Breuer
Modified: 2010-07-10 04:04 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
The (incomplete) patch mentioned above (8.56 KB, patch)
2004-02-28 18:48 UTC, Hans Breuer
needs-work Details | Review

Description Hans Breuer 2004-02-28 18:46:45 UTC
To get a more robust Gtk+ build I use to include the minimum
required moules with-in the respective library. This is simple 
with Pango (just link in pango/modules/modules/basic-$(PLATFORM).c);
the optional rest is build as modules. This way the user gets - even
with a broken setup - the ability to read error meesages.

For gtk the pixbuf loaders XPM and PNG are similar important,
(IIRC crashing sooner or later without them) so I'd like 
to include them as well. 
Though possible with the current code it also requires to include 
_all_ wanted loaders, cause one has to undefine USE_GMODULE. 
[Would be ok for loaders included in Gtk+, but dissallows to use
 external loaders like the librsvg one.]

The following patch does make USE_GMODULE independent of 
INCLUDE_$(format). It reflects the current needs outlined
above, i.e. not all io-$(format).c are changed yet, but you get 
the idea ;-)

Does this patch have any chance to be accepted ?

Thanks,
	Hans
Comment 1 Hans Breuer 2004-02-28 18:48:28 UTC
Created attachment 24904 [details] [review]
The (incomplete) patch mentioned above
Comment 2 Owen Taylor 2004-02-28 19:47:30 UTC
So, the proposal is to make --with-included-loaders
specify a set of static loaders to include and the rest
get built dynamically? I'm not opposed to a clean implementation
of that for 2.6.

See bug 71414 for a related bug with making it possible
to chose both the set of statically included loaders
and the set of dynamical loaders built for Pango.

Removing the PATCH keyword, since that generally is
supposed to refer to a patch that is potentially 
ready to apply.
Comment 3 Tor Lillqvist 2006-10-11 12:54:29 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 354184 ***