{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreid4yoimaqdf5zlhuta2ne5454hzoqgssekv2lsciixhvjqpvjffiq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:hqad6xwuzg7oqfmwylfkvqfm/app.bsky.feed.post/3mkhcxfwzh372"
  },
  "path": "/viewtopic.php?t=33381&p=272827#p272827",
  "publishedAt": "2026-04-27T04:05:35.000Z",
  "site": "http://forum.palemoon.org",
  "tags": [
    "@athenian200"
  ],
  "textContent": "> Might not be the intention, but from what @athenian200 is saying, it sounds like there may not be much choice. The GNU/Linux distros are already rapidly dropping (or planning to drop) their GTK2 libraries.\n\nYeah, and of course we will keep providing a version that can work with GTK2 if they can find it (probably into the early 2030s at least), but users may find that they have to hunt down a copy of the library themselves (maybe an old RPM or a DEB if they can't compile it), since even if we can build against it, they still need the runtime. Hopefully if it gets to that point, more of them will shrug and download the GTK3 version, but the really scary thing is the double-whammy implied by this.\n\nLet me put it like this. Pale Moon is a browser that prides itself on customizability and legacy options like NPAPI. We have no problems being that sort of browser on Windows or Mac. But on Linux... it feels like we're becoming something else. Just a worse Firefox that can't keep up with modern standards, and which just barely runs with no NPAPI and ugly themes. That's... not a good place to be, you get what I mean? Obviously I don't think it's entirely our fault, but people will start pushing us on how to build GTK2 so they can use the browser the way they want, or trying to build it themselves and frustrated they can't find it, etc.\n\nThis is not about dropping GTK2. At the moment, there's no pressing reason to remove the code, and no advantage in doing so. This is about having a version of the browser that works well for people who don't have access to GTK2, and not leaning on that old toolkit to have something worthwhile to offer people in that ecosystem. Linux is a different situation from XP, the XP code we wanted to get rid of was in the browser core. GTK2 is off by itself in the widget code, and it will remain relevant to people who stay on X11 if nothing else (which I imagine could be up to 30% of the Linux community). This actually resembles trying to keep up with rapidly changing web standards and falling short, but in our platform code, more than anything else.\n\nJust to be clear so anyone reading this understands, It's not about us voluntarily dropping GTK2 and someone making a protest fork... it's about GTK2 being dropped from distros and Linux users beginning to pester us constantly asking where they can get GTK2 after that happens, and we'll be expected to help them build a copy or find an RPM, etc. And the type of users doing this... they aren't the type that should be building a UXP application, they're usually out of their depth but desperately clinging to something old because they want their old stuff to work and don't know any better, and if we stop providing a GTK2 version, they'll try to build it and then get mad at us because it wasn't easy to build. It's more a case of, we'll leave the code and keep building the binaries, but unless they're willing to fight to obtain a copy of that old library, it won't do them any good and they'll be on the version of our browser they don't like because it's \"the only one that works\" and resent us a bit for the state of it. Maybe some of them will stick with ancient Linux or enterprise editions, but a lot of them will just use a normal modern Linux distro and fight it tooth and nail while getting angry with us.\n\n* * *",
  "title": "Platform Development • Re: Future of GTK2 and Pale Moon",
  "updatedAt": "2026-04-27T04:05:35.000Z"
}