[Development] New proposal for the tool naming

Lincoln Ramsay a1291762 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 24 01:07:07 CEST 2012

On 24/10/12 04:33, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> I think we are keeping it simple. The current proposal is the simplest 
> that still works. If you can come up with something even simpler, I'll 
> gladly accept it.
>>> If the option is required in one platform and does not cause anything but
>>> a minor inconvenience on others, why not document it?
>> So then will Qmake on Windows/Mac complain about the "-qt5" argument? Or
>> simply drop it?
> Drop it.

I know I complained about renaming qmake but... it would be simpler to 
rename qmake to qmake5 than to have a 'special' qmake that may or may 
not be the qmake that's first in your PATH and that may or may not do 
something with a -qtx switch.

So I'm going to remove my +1 for the 'special' qmake and instead suggest 
a much simpler solution. This is just for 'qmake' though, everything 
else... same as it was before.


qmake renamed to qmake5 and lives with the other binaries in <libexec>/bin
Create /usr/bin/qmake5 as a symlink to <libexec>/bin/qmake5 for Linux 
distro builds - triggered by some set of configure flags, NOT default 
behaviour for a source build


Create <libexec>/bin/qmake as a symlink to qmake5 (for Windows... a .bat 
or .cmd may work, else a copy).

The "officially supported" way to build thus becomes "qmake5" and it is 
guaranteed to work no matter what platform you're on or how you've set 
your PATH. Yes, we have to update all the documentation.

The optional symlink is for complainers like me, so we can continue to 
run qmake - but only if we set PATH correctly first. It'll also help 
with old instructions, scripts, etc. that would break if we just renamed 
qmake ;)


More information about the Development mailing list