Hello, Jacques--

I owe you thanks for your patient response to my somewhat grouchy 
questioning. Sorry about the long delay; I just haven't been dealing 
well with e-mail lately.

Jacques Garrigue wrote:

> Then something will have to be done about it at that time.
> But this has been the situation for already a few years, and
> gtkglarea2 is still working, so this doesn't seem a big concern.
> Note also that the great thing about free software is that anybody is
> allowed to fix a problem when it arises.

I certainly know that. Unfortunately, the people affected most by a 
problem aren't always in the best position to fix it. I guess I was 
frustrated because I would like to provide a complete package, and it 
happens that the problematic component is one that I really don't 
understand well.

> You just have to create a gtkglarea2 package together with the
> lablgtk2 package.

I will probably provide gtkglarea as part of the lablgtk2 package. I 
don't think it's good policy to introduce new Linux packages whose 
upstream source is no longer maintained.

> Not a big deal. Much less work than writing an
> interface for gtkglext and all the compatibility bindings (the
> compatibility bindings are the painful part.)

I don't doubt it, and in principle I have always been a strong advocate 
of backwards compatibility. But in this case I wonder (as mentioned in 
an earlier post) how much it really matters. Are there in fact 
significant projects using LablGTK2 with OpenGL?

> I'm satisfied that the situation is not as bad as I feared.

Thanks for the clarification.

> Note that some configurations breaking with gtk is not an unusual
> event.

Oh, yes, an old familiar story. Back around '98 or '99 I got very 
annoyed at the GTK development team: it seemed about once a month they 
would release a new "must-have" version that would break half the 
applications on my system, including--most ironically--the GIMP. Things 
have settled down a good deal since then.

--
Matt Gushee
Englewood, CO, USA