03/06/2012 § Leave a comment
Ok, so apparently application.h has been removed from the kit, and on all distributions. The commit entry I cited previously is a little misleading. I guess they should say something like “we NEED to put application.h back”. No word on when it’ll be put back in either. Oh well . We still have the old 2.4 system to play with. Now I can finally get back to coding. I have my own ideas for a password keeping applet I want to write for gnome. This was all kind of a waste of time anyway since I’m not sure how gtkmm works with the gnome panel framework, I think I’m going to need to write it using strait C/GTK+ (And THAT isn’t the case either, so that’s next on my list of things to do, learn how to write a gnome-applet using GTKMM). Anyway, I think its going to be useful so it’ll be my first submission to Github. I’ll announce it here so all 0 of you can look for it. Keep reading, Anon.
(An email exchange I had with members of the GTKMM Mailing List):
On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 17:55 +0000, (I Wrote, in reply to another list member)
> Application.h is missing from gtkmm 3.0 right now, I assume it'll be
> put back in in later releases of your distro.
> I spent all yesterday infact trying to understand what the situation
Note that you can at any time see the recent changes:
That’s Murry Cumming himself cutting in with the ‘Yes.’ Well, a one word reply from the chief wrangler and debutante of the ball is good enough for me.
What I didn’t include was WHY it took me all day to understand exactly what was missing and why, when it would be put back, and what distros where affected. Murray’s succinct reply doesn’t really explain any of this, nor is it exactly what I would call ‘plain’ from the commit logs. THIS is why I am a better customer support engineer than most code monkeys. They, 100% of the time, miss these simple explanations. I appreciate that this information, or some semblance thereof has been documented on a publicly available feed/outlet, but I do have something that resembles a life. And it is not my life to be aware of every information outlet that the GTKMM team chooses to use.
I have google, or duckduckgo. I rely on them to take me to the information I need on the net. Perhaps to my downfall, I understand that, but any more than that and I sincerely believe I am being asked for too much of as an information consumer.
First I MUST make an unholy bargain with google to trade my life for the information *I* want, then I am asked by the head meat-gatherer of a technical website to stay on top of the motions his group are making with regard to a technology they develop. THIS IS ON TOP of all the mundane little things that are a LEGAL and functional REQUIREMENT that I MUST HAVE to enable my life to function at as rough a level I am willing to tolerate (you know, taxes, traffic laws, bills, local taxes, sales taxes, VAT taxes, chewing gum, toilet paper…)
But Murray, if you’re reading this (and I know you aren’t so I feel at complete ease in saying this, as much respeck as I do have for your efforts); THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
Well, maybe I’m being too cynical. Perhaps part of being a good netizen is keeping a list of all the blogs of all the tool developers I use whose tools I use and check them daily. No, hourly. That way, they don’t have to be held liable for any damage or mayhem I might cuase using their tools due to my ignorance. Then I should be able to include a disclaimer with all my consulting work that I can’t be held liable for any mistakes in my code as I can’t know what uses they’ll put my code to or know all the documentationn outlets fed by the maintainers of the myriad collection of tools I need to get the job done… hey, we already do that. As Emily Litella used to say “Never mind”.