[Development] Alternative Proposal (was: Re: Summary of renaming changes)

Simon Hausmann simon.hausmann at digia.com
Fri Oct 19 15:01:05 CEST 2012

On Friday, October 19, 2012 02:24:09 PM Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 01:24:37PM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> > (1) It seems that there is an agreement on the naming of the libraries and
> > pkg-config files.
> not really. i'm not as strongly opposed to it as to renaming the tools,
> but i think renaming the libraries is mostly counterproductive, too:
> - the change is linux-only. on mac it simply cannot be done (in the
>   framework case) and on windows it is already this way. the latter is
>   rather ugly, as mentioned before.
> - it is entirely unnecessary for deployment, as shared object versioning
>   perfectly supports co-installed major versions
> - it is sort-of unnecessary for development, as -I & -L can be used to
>   specify which libraries to build against

Wouldn't it be kind of weird though if the libQtCore.so symlink would live in 
say /usr/lib/qt5/lib but libQtCore.so.5.0.0 itself would be locacted in 
(and then add multi-arch to the mix :)


More information about the Development mailing list