[Development] Co-installation & library naming rules

Lincoln Ramsay a1291762 at gmail.com
Fri Oct 12 02:01:03 CEST 2012

On 12/10/12 09:18, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> The only tools that need renaming are the tools that are run by users but are
> tied to a specific library version. That's basically qmake.
> If we had a generic build tool that worked with multiple Qt versions (like
> cmake), we wouldn't need to do it. Since our tool hardcodes Qt specifics and is
> not backwards compatible with older versions, we need to. That was our
> decision.

So why the arbitrary distinction of major version then?

I can trivially produce source-incompatible builds of Qt from the source 

Are we really going to guarantee that you'd never need more than one 
minor version of a specific major Qt installed at the same time?

I don't see this as any different to a tool like the compiler.

What I run in 99% of cases is gcc and the distro has decided which 
version that should be. For installing multiple versions, I can use the 
"complete" name (arch-platform-etc-version-gcc) or set my PATH to where 
that version's actual binaries are and continue to use gcc.


More information about the Development mailing list