> > I cannot see that gtk_object_get() is ever prototyped,
> 
>   From my /usr/X11R6/gtk/gtkobject.h:
> 
> ...
> /* gtk_object_get() sets the variable values pointed to by the adresses
>  * passed after the argument names according to the arguments value.
>  * if GTK_FUNDAMENTAL_TYPE (arg->type) == GTK_TYPE_STRING, it's
>  * the callers response to do a g_free (retrived_value);
>  */
> void    gtk_object_get          (GtkObject      *object,
>                                  const gchar    *first_arg_name,
>                                  ...);
> ...

On the other hand:

 /~~~ shell excerpt

/usr/X11/include/gtk: grep gtk_object_get *.h
gtkobject.h:GtkType     gtk_object_get_type             (void);
gtkobject.h:/* gtk_object_getv() sets an arguments type and value, or just
gtkobject.h:void        gtk_object_getv         (GtkObject      *object,
gtkobject.h: * gtk_object_set/gtk_object_get. if (arg_flags!=NULL),
gtkobject.h: *  `gtk_object_get_data' gets the data associated with "key".
gtkobject.h:gpointer gtk_object_get_data             (GtkObject *object,
gtkobject.h: *  `gtk_object_set_data'/`gtk_object_get_data' with a key of "user_data".
gtkobject.h:gpointer gtk_object_get_user_data (GtkObject        *object);
gtkobject.h:gpointer gtk_object_get_data_by_id  (GtkObject       *object,
/usr/X11/include/gtk: 

 \___ shell excerpt

(This is with gtk+-1.2.1, which is nominally sufficient for building
gnumeric.)


> > pkgsrc has recently been sup'ed by myself, and I believe that gtk was
> > built just for a recent round of installs (gtk+-1.2.1, FWIW).
> 
>   Ugh, this is way old.  The current version of gtk+ in pkgsrc is 1.2.6,
> and it works fine ...

Unfortunately, a lot depends upon gtk.  My understanding is that when you
update a package, it removes everything that depends upon it, first.  I
can see myself re-installing a LOT of things.

Ideally, shouldn't updating gtk be a drop-in replacement?  I.e., nothing
should strictly require being reinstalled/rebuilt, should they?  Is there
some way to coerce this behaviour out of the package system?


> > Is it just me or are GNOME and KDE starting to take on the
> > properties of MS-WINDOWS?  (Large, full of features that you'll
> 
>   I can't speak for KDE (I haven't used it for quite some time now), but
> GNOME is quite modular.  From your message I presume you have compiled
> the complete 'gnome' package (in pkgsrc/x11).  While this is 'nice', it

I wouldn't call it ``nice''.  (Well, I might, in quotes, as you have done.
But even then, I would probably refrain.  *grin*)  But, this probably
isn't the best place for a GNOME/KDE comparison/review.  Let's just say
that other than a few eye-candy backdrops and at least a temporary
infatuation with Eterm, I'm back to my old twm & desktopless
configuration.


> contains almost every GNOME module from the package system (much more
> than you probably need).  The package is intended to get you starting
> with a complete set of applications.

GNOME seems a little prone to trying to use things that don't exist,
however.  I believe that I hadn't installed xfishtank, but GNOME had an
option for Fish under Amusements; I tried to run it, and the panel seemed
to crash (and then was restarted by the GNOME core, I suppose).  In any
case, installing /x11/gnome seemed the logical thing to do if one wants
GNOME up and running.

Also, I'm one of those people who prefers to install everything to see
what's there.  Then, if I keep it, I may reinstall with fewer options, or
simply pare down what I have installed.


Thanks for the response, in any case.  (^&


  "I probably don't know what I'm talking about."  --rkr@rkr.kcnet.com