<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"/>
</head><body style="">
<div>
Hi,
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
> You still need Perl for building qtbase. Once you've got qtbase
</div>
<div>
> compiled, just compile the other modules you're interested in (qmake
<br/>> && make).
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Like discussed last year in the mailing list and forums the dependency
<br/>to Perl for building the core is a serious problem - none of the Windows
<br/>platforms I know of has a stable Perl release - even if there is usable version
<br/>(e.g. ActiveState Perl) it has to be deployed and managed separately and
<br/>has the problem of Perl version dependencies to the Qt build tools,
<br/>which have to be resolved manually.
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
With Qt 4.8 commercial users get an out of the box working toolkit -
</div>
<div>
Qt 5.x breaks that and introduces more error sources and unwanted
<br/>(and I'm very sure: unneccessary) dependencies.
<br/>
<br/>Why the hell does no Qt not include all build tools anymore?
<br/>Why MUST we developers/users search manually for matching tools
<br/>to just be able to compile the Qt core? For me thats a very worse joke...
<br/>
<br/>So currently the build system not only is based on QMake - it needs
<br/>an external not provided scripting language, too.
<br/>
<br/>Very short sighted.
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Best Regards,
</div>
<div>
Christian
<br/>
<br/>PS: I know Qt from version 2.3.2 on and saw many party extreme development descisions - this one is (for the Qt core) one of the most stupid ones.
</div>
</body></html>