symbol lookup error: /usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0: undefined symbol

Hi,

I am able to compile Firefox 1.5 on Fedora 6.
but when I run it, I get this error:

./firefox-objdir/dist/bin/firefox-bin: symbol lookup error:
/usr/lib/libgnomevfs-2.so.0: undefined symbol:
g_thread_pool_set_sort_function

Can you please help me how to fix it?

Thank you.

Re: Replacing control center menus

Hi

> This also could mean that we have too many capplets.

I prefer to keep capplet simple-stupid. Capplets are numerous, or you go
to complex capplet that do too many things. Complex capplet end worse
than an applet launcher. A good applet launcher must go away after
launch or substitute the capplet to itself (see KDE, Mac OS X or Windows
control center).

Étienne.
--

-- 
Verso l'Alto !

_______________________________________________
gnome-devel-list mailing list
gnome-devel-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devel-list

Gnome Status bar

Hello,

Is there any way to customize the Gnome status bar ?
I would like to add some button showing status of connection (to data base), and
by clicking on the button, open a connection dialog.

Any hint ?
Thanks all.

+--------------------+
+ Laurent Marzullo
+

Re: Gnome Status bar

On Do, 2006-12-21 at 11:10 +0100, Laurent Marzullo wrote:
> Is there any way to customize the Gnome status bar ?
> I would like to add some button showing status of connection (to data base), and
> by clicking on the button, open a connection dialog.

You could just create a "System Tray Applet" using the GtkStatusIocn API
to develop such an application.

Regards,
  Sven

.Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

Hello.

May I ask what is with all the push for C# apps in GNOME?

The main beauty of GNOME is that it is slick and unbloated.
Do we really need to throw a virtual machine in it?

If we really want to develop code in object oriented language, with all
the fancy syntactic sugar, garbage collection etc.
can't we just use D to achieve it?  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/

It has all the cool features of modern languages (like C# or Java):
C like syntax, OOP, nice templating, closures, garbage collected memory
management, dynamic and hashed arrays, real strings, inline assembly,
exceptions, unit tests, direct interface to C, unicode support ... and
many, many more,
...
with the advantage of producing real ELF objects, that can be linked
with any other objects .archives or .so dynamic libraries (using
standard GCC linker) to produce little, cute binaries that can be run on
REAL hardware, without the need of virtual machine.

--

-- 
Tomasz Sterna
Xiaoka Grp.  http://www.xiaoka.com/

Re: .Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

2006-12-28 klockan 07:24 skrev Tomasz Sterna:
> If we really want to develop code in object oriented language, with all
> the fancy syntactic sugar, garbage collection etc.
> can't we just use D to achieve it?  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/

Or Python, which is already an accepted Gnome language. Furthermore, lots of
people have experience using Python and several parts of the standard Gnome
desktop are written using Python, eg. some gnome-applets, deskbar-applet,
pessulus, sabayon.

  mvrgr, Wouter

--

-- 
:wq                                                       mail uws <at> xs4all.nl
                                                      web http://uwstopia.nl

tell myself that i'm not ready yet :: i want to live         -- heather nova

_______________________________________________
gnome-devel-list mailing list
gnome-devel-list <at> gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-devel-list

Re: .Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

2006/12/28, Wouter Bolsterlee <uws+gnome <at> xs4all.nl>:
> 2006-12-28 klockan 07:24 skrev Tomasz Sterna:
> > If we really want to develop code in object oriented language, with all
> > the fancy syntactic sugar, garbage collection etc.
> > can't we just use D to achieve it?  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
>
> Or Python, which is already an accepted Gnome language. Furthermore, lots of
> people have experience using Python and several parts of the standard Gnome
> desktop are written using Python, eg. some gnome-applets, deskbar-applet,
> pessulus, sabayon.

Or [favourite OO-language], which beats [whatever was already decided
on months ago] since it has [my favourite feature #1] and [my
favourite feature #2] while [whatever was already decided on months
ago] only has [insignificant feature to me].

And while you're at it, switch the SCM to [favourite SCM] instead of
[whatever was already decided on months ago] (see above for good
reasons).

Thnaks.

P.S. If you don't spot the sarcasm, please ignore this message

--

-- 
Kalle Vahlman, zuh <at> iki.fi
Powered by http://movial.fi
Interesting stuff at http://syslog.movial.fi

Re: .Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

Tomasz Sterna wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> May I ask what is with all the push for C# apps in GNOME?
> 
> The main beauty of GNOME is that it is slick and unbloated.
> Do we really need to throw a virtual machine in it?
> 
> If we really want to develop code in object oriented language, with all
> the fancy syntactic sugar, garbage collection etc.
> can't we just use D to achieve it?  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
> 
> It has all the cool features of modern languages (like C# or Java):
> C like syntax, OOP, nice templating, closures, garbage collected memory
> management, dynamic and hashed arrays, real strings, inline assembly,
> exceptions, unit tests, direct interface to C, unicode support ... and
> many, many more,

Although I agree with you wrt to the D language - it rocks!, I dont 
think specific languages matter all that much (and we dont need to start 
another language flame war)

whats important is native code has much higher quality (performance, 
memory usage and bloat) than VM based languages and hence it will be 
preferred in cases where speed/memory usage matters most.

Due to Gnome being usable on lower end machines and thin clients, its 
unacceptable for core apps like the panel, file manager, daemons and a 
few others to be VM based and this is more of an unwritten rule in GNOME.

Re: .Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

2006-12-28 klockan 11:49 skrev Kalle Vahlman:
> 
> 2006/12/28, Wouter Bolsterlee <uws+gnome <at> xs4all.nl>:
> > 2006-12-28 klockan 07:24 skrev Tomasz Sterna:
> > > If we really want to develop code in object oriented language, with all
> > > the fancy syntactic sugar, garbage collection etc.
> > > can't we just use D to achieve it?  http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
> >
> > Or Python, which is already an accepted Gnome language. Furthermore, lots of
> > people have experience using Python and several parts of the standard Gnome
> > desktop are written using Python, eg. some gnome-applets, deskbar-applet,
> > pessulus, sabayon.
> 
> Or [favourite OO-language], which beats [whatever was already decided
> on months ago] since it has [my favourite feature #1] and [my
> favourite feature #2] while [whatever was already decided on months
> ago] only has [insignificant feature to me].

This wasn't intended a programming language flame...

> P.S. If you don't spot the sarcasm, please ignore this message

...I was just trying to say that the argument doesn't hold since we already
have widely used OO languages in the Gnome stack.

  mvrgr, Wouter

Re: .Net/Mono and C# in GNOME? Do we really need it?

2006/12/28, Wouter Bolsterlee <uws+gnome <at> xs4all.nl>:
> 2006-12-28 klockan 11:49 skrev Kalle Vahlman:
> This wasn't intended a programming language flame...

Nor was I taking it as one. The pun was directed at the whole notion
of discussing yet again of the same, already decided point. Of the
everlasting issue of which language is prettier/faster/better than the
others.

> > P.S. If you don't spot the sarcasm, please ignore this message
>
> ...I was just trying to say that the argument doesn't hold since we already
> have widely used OO languages in the Gnome stack.

Sure. And if one looks at the original discussion, it's obvious
mono/C# isn't supported because GNOME would have lacked OO-languages,
but instead because GNOME would benefit from the cool apps that are
written with it. The same _will_ be an option for D once there is nice
and stable bindings to GNOME[1] and some seriously cool
GNOME-integrated apps for it.

I'm all for including apps made in D and all the other pretty
languages in the world, but obviously they need to have rocking GNOME
bindings and killer apps first. It's not a question of which is
prettier.

[1] Not sure if it has already?

--

--