Yes, because GTK2 is so difficult to upgrade to new versions, whereas Qt4 to Qt5 usually only involved replacing a few identifiers (cannot speak to Qt6 since I don't do Qt anymore). That's why distros need to drag GTK2 along even though we are already at GTK4.
I work on the IUP fork, where I have and support the Qt driver, which works with both Qt5 and Qt6, and I only need a couple of checks to make it work on both. I often check if I broke the Qt5 build; nope, all good there, hard to break. For GTK3 and GTK4, those must be separate drivers; there's no way you can handle that with a couple of checks. Everything is different. That was possible to some extent and works with GTK2/GTK3 (single driver), but there are so many checks and workarounds there. Qt is so nice to work with.
Yeah let's start on a specific version that they overhauled the API since computers are getting new hardware features, god forbid a different DPI. And use that as a leverage point against a library that kept their API quite stable for the last 20 years!
Especially when comparing Qt against a library who couldn't keep its shit together for 5 years and is infamous for breaking all sorts of API and removing features.
> since computers are getting new hardware features
It's not possible to move forwards fast anywhere.
> and removing features
Yeah, this is indeed very unfortunate. They claim the GTK core team is about 2 devs, so tiny that we're lucky the development goes further at all. Hard to understand considering Red Hat became part of IBM.
> to a newly-allocated part of the drive's LBA space
Which is rather a case for home use, not practical for highly parallel access industrial use cases. That's why the issue became a research topic. For the first time I saw a proof that the "fact" SSDs do not need defragmentation is actually a myth. Well, you still want to avoid explicit defragmentation (waste of time and SSD lifetime) by filesystem driver submitting additional hints (using new NVMe extensions) to the SSD controller about what blocks belong to the same file, so that SSD can place them for an optimal sequential access with properly interleaving (not necessary strictly physically consecutively whatever this means on SSD).
That's what I thought at first but then discovered:
> universal clipboard is synchronized over internet, it is not done trough cable connection. it uses apple continuity service, what you put into UC is uploaded into apple cloud,..
If the law wouldn't say 24 hours counting only working hours (3 working days for small business or even weeks during vacations), then it wouldn't be an exempt.
This is an interesting point of view. I've been thinking that only the moment counts, when the manufacturer has been made aware, regardless when the manufacturer has in fact actively become aware. Thanks!
I have a lot of contact with the CRA at work and I actually think its a very good piece of regulation. There are barely any parts where I think they are straight up bad.
I think it only hurts super small one man part time developers but even then: If I pay for a piece of software I expect it to be secure and have a bit of support.
reply