5 ms·

Nice to see that someone is still maintaining the original GTK1 toolkit. It's like the classic Win32 UI API for the Linux/Unix. Linux UI libraries are a constan

by joz1-k 1y ago

Nice to see that someone is still maintaining the original GTK1 toolkit. It's like the classic Win32 UI API for the Linux/Unix. Linux UI libraries are a constantly moving target and one can be easily more occupied by adapting to those toolkit API changes instead of focusing on the features of the application itself. I guess that CinePaint developers decided at some point that they don't want to endure API changes in the UI toolkit anymore. On the other hand, I think GTK1 doesn't even support Unicode.

pferde 1y ago
Yeah, I think GTK2 would be a better candidate to keep maintaining. GTK3 is where it started to go to hell in a handbasket.
- zokier 1y ago
  Gtk2 also had exceptionally long lifetime, initial release in 2002 and last release in 2020. In contrast Gtk1 was initially released in 1998 and last release was 2001.
WesolyKubeczek 1y ago
It doesn't support Unicode, doesn't support font antialiasing, and instead of fontconfig, you need to grapple with X11 core font support, using ttmkfdir and friends, and make the X11 server aware of where the fonts are. It's some experience I definitely don't miss from those days.
- joz1-k 1y ago
  Oh, yes, I remember those early times as well. :) The question is whether it's possible to maintain the legacy API and upgrade the internal architecture to use more modern approaches. I think it's almost always possible, but perhaps the cost to develop and maintain such a legacy layer is too high for an open-source desktop environment and toolkit. The Windows OS managed to support old APIs quite well, but the available resources are incomparable.
- anthk 1y ago
  Motif was improved with XFT/Fontconfig support. GTK1 can be patched too'
- floam 1y ago
  Are you sure no antialiasing? No subpixel for sure. I think I have some rusty memory of LD_PRELOAD my own .so with AA enabled (special patch? I don’t recall) with a game’s installer I shipped to get the statically linked GTK+1.2 Loki Games setup utility looking modern. That plus a QUITE SPIFFY looking splash bitmap slapped onto it would hopefully let the installation complete before anyone realized it was a creaky old thing.
  - floam 1y ago
    Oh yes. I present you gtkaa: https://web.archive.org/web/20231129124306/http://alx14.free.fr/gtkaa/ https://web.archive.org/web/20231129124306/http://alx14.free...
    - WesolyKubeczek 1y ago
      …and recompile mozilla and nautilus and maybe all other stuff using gtk1… As someone who used to build Mozilla suite back when their gtk2 support was experimental, I’d say this is too much faff.
  - Findecanor 1y ago
    GTK 1.x used GDK which was a thin veneer on top of Xlib, and I think it defaulted to use Xlib calls for text rendering. If the X server supported antialiased text (and subpixel rendering) then GTK should have done too.
    - vidarh 1y ago
      Do any X servers do? Antialiased text on X is generally done by rendering the glyphs client side.
      - anthk 1y ago
        They did with the XFT font server? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Font_Server https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Font_Server
- tiahura 1y ago
  I wonder how many llm tokens are burned dealing with Unicode issues?
bbanyc 1y ago
The "classic API" would probably be Xaw or Motif. Those haven't changed since practically before there was Linux.
- joz1-k 1y ago
  Then I would vote for Motif. But since it predates Linux, it is a classic Unix look, not Linux. For the younger crowd: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motif_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motif_(software)>
- thw_9a83c 1y ago
  Motif was the real "classic" API. But let's do a little justice to GTK1. Motif was still a proprietary library when GTK1 was released. GTK1 was also already easier to develop with, and the default look&feel was somehow better. For some reason, all the widgets in the Motif UI were huge. Given the small resolutions of that time, it was very space inefficient.
  - moregrist 1y ago
    If I remember correctly, Xaw was part of X and predated Motif although it’s hard to really call Xaw a full UI; it was pretty bare bones and limited. It’s worth keeping in mind that there were other Unix UIs that didn’t make it. For example, Sun NeWS was quite interesting (based on PostScript). > For some reason, all the widgets in the Motif UI were huge. Huge and IMO quite ugly. Also slow. Not that Xaw was pretty ( or even that functional). GTK1 was definitely a step in the right direction.
    - jandrese 1y ago
      Xaw was also really awful to program in. When I tried using it once I ended up reverting to just plain Xlib and was much happier, even having to build my own widgets out of low level primitives.
  - Findecanor 1y ago
    The free clone "LessTif" already existed when "GTK+" 1.x came along. I agree that GTK was much easier to program, and had a better feel but the look was mimicking Motif except that every widget instead used a shaded button-style border — and that looked very ugly IMHO. However, GTK 1.x supported theme engines. Back in the day, my theme for GTK 1.x was one of the most popular, giving programs a look reminiscent of NeXTStep and Windows 95. The engine also (optionally) hacked the GTK widgets, adding triangular tabs and subtly improved menu behaviour. When GTK 2.0 came along, it had a much improved default look that felt like its own thing, and also the new menu behaviour so my theme wasn't needed any more.

by joz1-k 1y ago

pferde 1y ago

Yeah, I think GTK2 would be a better candidate to keep maintaining. GTK3 is where it started to go to hell in a handbasket.

zokier 1y ago
Gtk2 also had exceptionally long lifetime, initial release in 2002 and last release in 2020. In contrast Gtk1 was initially released in 1998 and last release was 2001.

WesolyKubeczek 1y ago

It doesn't support Unicode, doesn't support font antialiasing, and instead of fontconfig, you need to grapple with X11 core font support, using ttmkfdir and friends, and make the X11 server aware of where the fonts are. It's some experience I definitely don't miss from those days.

joz1-k 1y ago
Oh, yes, I remember those early times as well. :) The question is whether it's possible to maintain the legacy API and upgrade the internal architecture to use more modern approaches. I think it's almost always possible, but perhaps the cost to develop and maintain such a legacy layer is too high for an open-source desktop environment and toolkit. The Windows OS managed to support old APIs quite well, but the available resources are incomparable.
anthk 1y ago
Motif was improved with XFT/Fontconfig support. GTK1 can be patched too'
floam 1y ago
Are you sure no antialiasing? No subpixel for sure. I think I have some rusty memory of LD_PRELOAD my own .so with AA enabled (special patch? I don’t recall) with a game’s installer I shipped to get the statically linked GTK+1.2 Loki Games setup utility looking modern. That plus a QUITE SPIFFY looking splash bitmap slapped onto it would hopefully let the installation complete before anyone realized it was a creaky old thing.
- floam 1y ago
  Oh yes. I present you gtkaa: https://web.archive.org/web/20231129124306/http://alx14.free.fr/gtkaa/ https://web.archive.org/web/20231129124306/http://alx14.free...
  - WesolyKubeczek 1y ago
    …and recompile mozilla and nautilus and maybe all other stuff using gtk1… As someone who used to build Mozilla suite back when their gtk2 support was experimental, I’d say this is too much faff.
- Findecanor 1y ago
  GTK 1.x used GDK which was a thin veneer on top of Xlib, and I think it defaulted to use Xlib calls for text rendering. If the X server supported antialiased text (and subpixel rendering) then GTK should have done too.
  - vidarh 1y ago
    Do any X servers do? Antialiased text on X is generally done by rendering the glyphs client side.
    - anthk 1y ago
      They did with the XFT font server? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Font_Server https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Font_Server
tiahura 1y ago
I wonder how many llm tokens are burned dealing with Unicode issues?

bbanyc 1y ago

The "classic API" would probably be Xaw or Motif. Those haven't changed since practically before there was Linux.

joz1-k 1y ago
Then I would vote for Motif. But since it predates Linux, it is a classic Unix look, not Linux. For the younger crowd: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motif_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motif_(software)>
thw_9a83c 1y ago
Motif was the real "classic" API. But let's do a little justice to GTK1. Motif was still a proprietary library when GTK1 was released. GTK1 was also already easier to develop with, and the default look&feel was somehow better. For some reason, all the widgets in the Motif UI were huge. Given the small resolutions of that time, it was very space inefficient.
- moregrist 1y ago
  If I remember correctly, Xaw was part of X and predated Motif although it’s hard to really call Xaw a full UI; it was pretty bare bones and limited. It’s worth keeping in mind that there were other Unix UIs that didn’t make it. For example, Sun NeWS was quite interesting (based on PostScript). > For some reason, all the widgets in the Motif UI were huge. Huge and IMO quite ugly. Also slow. Not that Xaw was pretty ( or even that functional). GTK1 was definitely a step in the right direction.
  - jandrese 1y ago
    Xaw was also really awful to program in. When I tried using it once I ended up reverting to just plain Xlib and was much happier, even having to build my own widgets out of low level primitives.
- Findecanor 1y ago
  The free clone "LessTif" already existed when "GTK+" 1.x came along. I agree that GTK was much easier to program, and had a better feel but the look was mimicking Motif except that every widget instead used a shaded button-style border — and that looked very ugly IMHO. However, GTK 1.x supported theme engines. Back in the day, my theme for GTK 1.x was one of the most popular, giving programs a look reminiscent of NeXTStep and Windows 95. The engine also (optionally) hacked the GTK widgets, adding triangular tabs and subtly improved menu behaviour. When GTK 2.0 came along, it had a much improved default look that felt like its own thing, and also the new menu behaviour so my theme wasn't needed any more.