> The audience of Linux does not restrict to email, browsing, and
office suite, that is end users of shiny applications. There is another
kind of audience: people who need to develop their own custom
applications; these people don't care of look and feel, but they care
with development time.

Yes, but if you're implying that the cost in development time is only worth
it for massively complex apps like browsers and office suites, that's a
bit of a mischaracterization.  Qt even has a declarative language geared
toward simple custom interfaces for just the type of developers you
describe.
If we're talking about the complexity of dependency chains then toolkit
choice might be fairly straightforward.  But outside of that you have to
investigate the feature set and try using the tools.
-Jonathan

    On Saturday, November 28, 2015 2:39 PM, Roger Leigh <rleigh@???> wrote:

On 28/11/2015 18:46, Godefridus Daalmans wrote:
> If your programs depend on CDE, you could try to compile them against
> lesstif2,
> that's an LGPL implementation of Motif, on top of just the X libraries.
>
> I don't know if it's binary-compatible or if it's actively maintained.

Not sure of its current status, but given the need for Motif is now very
low, I would imagine it's not too active.

The other thing to point out is that the real Motif toolkit was opened
up with the relicensing of CDE.  There was some initial activity to make
it build and run on modern systems, but not sure what the current state
of some things are, e.g. client-side fonts and unicode (was previously
old-style XLFD and no unicode).  So the need for lesstif is now moot,
unless there are lesstif bits to merge into motif.


Regards,
Roger
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@???
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng