undefined reference to main when compiling with gtk+

[Darkbolt]

Hi, I've been able to succesfully compile celestia using qt....However personally I find qt rather repulsive, and slow, opposed to gtk. However, When I compile it for qt using

./configure --with-gtk , I get an error about gnomeConf.sh. When I configure it with ./configure --with-gtk --gtk-prefix=/usr/lib --without-gnome , I get an undefined reference to 'main' error

For further information, I'm using slackware 9.0, with gcc 3.2, glibc 2.3.1, and if it makes any difference I have mesa 5.0 installed, and i'm using the nvidia drivers (4363)....I've noticed a few people have had this problem in the past, but the only way they've been able to compile it is with qt...So if anyone knows a fix allowing gtk, or can offer some sort of assistance, I'd be greatly appreciative

[Christophe]

I don't think you can compile Celestia with GTK and without Gnome. There is no pure GTK version, some Gnome functions are needed. In addition it is Gnome 1.x that is needed, if you have Gnome 2.x only that explains the gnomeConf.sh error.

The Gnome/GTK version is not actively maintained anymore. The current developer team will not port it to Gnome 2, so unless someone volunteers the situation will stay unsatisfactory for Gnome lovers.

I don't understand what you mean when you say you find Qt 'repulsive'? A toolkit is a toolkit, from the user's standpoint there isn't that much difference between GTK and Qt.

[jamarsa]

I don't understand what you mean when you say you find Qt 'repulsive'? A toolkit is a toolkit, from the user's standpoint there isn't that much difference between GTK and Qt.

Touched in your "sensitive" point, aren't you, Christophe?

Indeed, he refers tho the KDE-GNOME rivalry... Or perhaps the 'slot' approach of Qt?

I agree that KDE is more mature and active now, but i see it as a bit bloated and non scalable on features, while a little rough in the "artistic" sense. Personal preferences, of course...

[Darkbolt]

Qt is ugly plain and simple...Mosfet may have worked some wonders, but it's still a slow, resource pig.

when you start up an app with qt, it starts up a background app callled 'kdeinit' which takes up its fair bit of ram

I dont have gnome1.4 installed, I upgraded to 2.2.2, which explains it indeed

[jamarsa]

Hey, my Zaurus works under Qt (Qtopia) and is quick, simple, efficient and beautiful!! So don't scare the poor child!!

[Christophe]

Qt is ugly plain and simple...Mosfet may have worked some wonders, but it's still a slow, resource pig.

Both Qt and GTK being fully themable I really don't understand that reasoning about the 'look' of the toolkit. The perceived speed is another point, I personaly don't find a big difference in speed between GTK or KDE apps, but that's probably system dependant too.

when you start up an app with qt, it starts up a background app callled 'kdeinit' which takes up its fair bit of ram

kdeinit is simply a mean of preloading KDE's main libraries, it doesn't take any RAM that wouldn't be used by the app anyway. However you can probably discuss the relative memory requirement of the same app using KDE or Gnome, but I've never seen a convincing study about this. Using either KDE or Gnome my computer doesn't swap, and that's all that matters to me.

[Christophe]

Touched in your "sensitive" point, aren't you, Christophe? :wink:

No, I'm not a Qt/KDE bigot, I don't like people making that kind of religious unmotivated clame: KDE/Gnome stinks, Gnome/KDE rules. I find it especially laughable since from the user perspective there is very little difference between the two. I can understand someone prefering one to the other, but such rejection of one and adulation of the other is just nonsense to me.

[jamarsa]

I don't like people making that kind of religious unmotivated clame: KDE/Gnome stinks, Gnome/KDE rules

Ah, yes, that's the most stupid attitude in the Gnu/Linux world. As I said before, its a matter of personal tastes; and while I prefer Gnome for the desktop, I run KDE apps often within Gnome, and the opposite. In my PDA, however, I run a Qt-based interface, and I'm pleased with it.

[Darkbolt]

Qt is ugly plain and simple...Mosfet may have worked some wonders, but it's still a slow, resource pig.

Both Qt and GTK being fully themable I really don't understand that reasoning about the 'look' of the toolkit. The perceived speed is another point, I personaly don't find a big difference in speed between GTK or KDE apps, but that's probably system dependant too.

when you start up an app with qt, it starts up a background app callled 'kdeinit' which takes up its fair bit of ram

kdeinit is simply a mean of preloading KDE's main libraries, it doesn't take any RAM that wouldn't be used by the app anyway. However you can probably discuss the relative memory requirement of the same app using KDE or Gnome, but I've never seen a convincing study about this. Using either KDE or Gnome my computer doesn't swap, and that's all that matters to me.

My point is they take up too much ram to begin with....20+mb for something as simple as kppp?...Not worth using.

Overall I try to use gtk/gtk2 apps when available

yes qt/kde is completely themeable,but I personally dont like going into kde to theme it, quite frankly because if I didnt have celestia installed, I wouldnt have kde/qt installed either...So I think it's a shame that it no longer supports gtk

[Christophe]

My point is they take up too much ram to begin with....20+mb for something as simple as kppp?...Not worth using.

Overall I try to use gtk/gtk2 apps when available

Of course, I understand that, using KDE apps from Gnome or Gnome apps from KDE uses memory since you have to have both library sets loaded at the same time.

yes qt/kde is completely themeable,but I personally dont like going into kde to theme it, quite frankly because if I didnt have celestia installed, I wouldnt have kde/qt installed either...So I think it's a shame that it no longer supports gtk

Well, that's exactly what I thought when I found Celestia: what a shame that there is no KDE version... and that's when I started coding a KDE app for the first time. It's up to you to start coding for Gnome 2 or find someone willing to.

[Darkbolt]

Still, even if I dont have gnome1.4 installed I should still be able to utilize gtk1.2, which I can, and do (with gimp, though now i'm using the dev. version which has gkt2 support...xmms also makes use of gtk1.2)...Unfourtunetly I dont know how to program in either c++ or gtk...Otherwise i would gladly spend time making it gtk2 compatible

[Christophe]

Still, even if I dont have gnome1.4 installed I should still be able to utilize gtk1.2, which I can, and do (with gimp, though now i'm using the dev. version which has gkt2 support...xmms also makes use of gtk1.2)...Unfourtunetly I dont know how to program in either c++ or gtk...Otherwise i would gladly spend time making it gtk2 compatible

Are you sure you don't have the Gnome 1.x libraries installed? If you use Gimp and Xmms I think you do, you're probably just missing the -dev package to be able to build the GTK version of Celestia.

[Darkbolt]

you do not need gnome to use gimp atall, the only thing they have in common is gtk. I do not have the gnome 1.4 libraries installed.

as for the devel packages, I compiled gtk-1.2 from source, so it should have all of them

[Christophe]

You don't need libgnome to run the Gimp but you do need the glib which is also part of the Gnome library set. I got confused.

To build Celestia you need in addition to gtk and gtk-devel, the libgnome and libgnome-devel packages in their 1.x versions.

[Darkbolt]

glib is not part of the gnome library set, it's a dependency of gtk, so in order to run gnome ( which is gtk based obviously) you need it

The devs that make gtk are the ones that make glib

[Christophe]

glib is not part of the gnome library set

That depends on what you call the Gnome Library Set. In any case it is listed on the Gnome API Reference page.