Subject: Re: mozilla stability (or lack thereof) vs. gdk-pixbuf.
To: NetBSD Packages Technical Discussion List <tech-pkg@NetBSD.ORG>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/12/2002 15:19:06
[ On Sunday, June 9, 2002 at 18:20:36 (+0200), Lubomir Sedlacik wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: mozilla stability (or lack thereof) vs. gdk-pixbuf.
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 12:15:32PM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > Now if I'm not grossly mistaken gdk-pixbuf replaces Imlib. The
> > Mozilla documentation says mozilla uses "Imagelib" to load images. Is
> > graphics/imlib the same as what they call "Imagelib"? Is Imagelib
> > more robust?
Are you saying we should be using libpr0n, aka libimg2, instead of gdk-pixbuf?
(from what I read on the links above I would agree -- I'm just not clear
on exactly what API is used/needed and how all these things relate)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098; <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>; <email@example.com>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>