[Development] Summary of renaming changes

André Pönitz andre.poenitz at mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de
Fri Oct 19 22:30:38 CEST 2012

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 08:02:46PM +0000, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2012-10-19, André Pönitz <andre.poenitz at mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
> >> Really. I really want, both as a Qt contributor and a Qt packager to
> >> ship a pristine Qt. Please help me make it happen.
> > Demanding to be relieved from that burden is one thing. Demanding to
> > use an approach that will break thousands of other projects is a
> > different one. It is unreasonable.
> I am a bit saddened by this paragraph. I'm not demanding anything. I'm
> *explaining* my situation *hoping* that we can do something.

Sorry if this came out more personal than it was intended. 
> I could also be *begging* if *you* would prefer that, but I wouldn't
> expet that.

I don't expect or want begging. It would be sufficient if proposals
that clearly increase total pain when taking all users into account
would not need to be discussed.

> [...]
> Oh. btw, whattabout a solution with all tools having a 5 suffixed in
> /usr/bin and then creating a symlink farm somewhere with unversioned
> tools for people who has special needs?

The solution "out-of-path-dir-with-binaries + links" allows an
arbitrary number of fully functional Qt builds being present,
not just for major versions, but also for different configutations
of the same version, easy selection between such builds by
modifying PATH, and does not hurt non-Linux users.

The solution of putting renamed binaries in the path (with or
without additional symlinks) allows only one set of binaries,
or, at the very least makes on such set "special". Moreover,
the renaming as such introduces problems, see the comments on


More information about the Development mailing list