[Development] Android missing SONAME in lib's causes

BogDan bog_dan_ro at yahoo.com
Tue Aug 13 13:04:40 CEST 2013

>>  >>  This provides a improvement for me but it is not a complete 

> solution,
>>  >>on 
>>  >>
>>  >>  android we load libQt5xxx.so my solution as it was still tried to 
> load
>>  >>  libQt5xxx.so.5 which doesn't exist as libraries are not 
> symlinked on
>>  >>  android like they are on Linux and only libQt5xxx.so is present.
>>  >>
>>  > Then perhaps this is the reason that the variable is simply cleared on
>>  > Android. qmake should probably generate the SONAME without the version 
> on
>>  > android?
>>  > 
>>  > Ossi, is that possible?
>>  > 
>>  > Thanks,
>>  Hello,
>>  If you are going to roll it back
>>  https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,61330 a few things will stop to
>>  work immediately:
>>   - android qt creator plugin.
> I'd like to get this issue resolved.
> Bogdan, how does https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,61330 break the qt 
> creator plugin?

It breaks it because QTC plugin expects that .so libs to end with ".so" and we need to
synchronize the new QTC with Qt 5.2 release. Anyway QTC plugin is the last thing 
that I'm worry about, probably it can be fixed in a few hours/days.
The major problem that I see is that we need to use symlinks which for Android
doesn't help at all, even more it will make the things much more complicated.
As I already said in my previous mail, on Android there are just two methods to
deploy an application.
1. Using Ministro. In this case adding symlinks to libs it will be a nightmare to handle
them by Ministro.
2. Bundling all libs in the apk, neither here we don't need any symlinks and again,
it will make the things much more complicated. I don't believe that java part can handle
symlinks in this moment. Also QTC plugin needs more love on this matter too.

IMHO the questions are: 

- Do we *really* need this change?
- It's worth to break a lot of things to have this change?
- Isn't easier to fix cmake build system instead?

Personally I don't think we need it and (for sure) I don't think it worth the trouble.
On the other hand, if on this list everyone else thinks that I'm wrong and you'll decide
to submit the patch, I'll obey and I'll start to think how to handle this change in Ministro.
Be aware that Qt 5.2 is the last chance to submit the patch, after Android will be consider 
as a must to have platform and it will be labeled as beta/stable we must be back 
compatible and this kind of changes are out of question then :) !

I really like to know at least Eskil's and Daniel's opinions on this matter.

Thanks for your understanding!


P.S. Just to be clear, I have nothing against cmake, I like cmake and I do believe that is
a big plus for Qt (also qbs) but ... :)

More information about the Development mailing list