I noticed a lack of pixmaps in gkrellm. After some investigation, I came up with the following testcase: #include <gtk/gtk.h> int main() { gdk_init(NULL, NULL); gchar *fname = "/usr/share/gkrellm2/themes/BlueMask/frame_top.png"; GdkPixbuf *pixbuf = gdk_pixbuf_new_from_file(fname, NULL); printf(pixbuf ? "OK !\n" : "FAILED !\n"); return 0; } The testcase succeeds on gtk+ 2.12.12, but fails on gtk+ 2.14.7-r2 or gtk+-2.16.6 (even with CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS="-O2"). I tried adding debugging code to gtk+ but compilation fails as soon as I add a single printf() to "gdk-pixbuf-io.c".
Created attachment 207330 [details] Here's frame_top.png (for those who don't have gkrellm installed)
To run the testcase: gcc -Wall -o test test.c `pkg-config --cflags --libs gtk+-2.0` && ./test My test system is not a fresh install of Gentoo: it's a mix of x86 and ~x86 packages, and has been continually upgraded since about 2004. So perhaps there might be something lying around, that confuses gtk+ ? So far I only tried rebuilding glib and gtk+.
Just to rule out one possibility: does this happen for all users on your system, or only the one you log in as? I'm asking because I've had the same problem, and it took a couple of hours to figure out I had corrupted files in my home directory.
Hi Harald, Good idea, I didn't think of it. But no, unfortunately it's the same problem for a newly-created user.
Pretty sure this is a dupe of bug #288312
Sorry, my Comment #4 was wrong: With a newly created user, gkrellm works perfectly ! And the testcase succeeds too. What should I try removing from my user dir ?
Yes Samuli, you're right: removing ~/.local/share/mime solves the problem completely. No offense intended here, but it looks like the upstream gtk+ team did a _very_ bad design choice here. Did they assume that every user of gtk+ 2.4 will re-create their home directory from scratch ??
(In reply to comment #5 and comment #7) Closing as such. I wish the bug was there when I ran into this... didn't link it to the upgrade. :) Good that there's a warning for it now. (Personal opinion: mostly agreed, it wasn't necessarily a bad decision to change the format, but it was carried out horribly.) *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 288312 ***
Agreed, Harald. And many thanks to you all :-)