[Development] Reviews needed before android integration in two weeks

Simon Hausmann simon.hausmann at digia.com
Tue Feb 5 12:39:12 CET 2013


On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 02:58:47 AM BogDan wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > On Tuesday, February 05, 2013 11:33:29 AM Paul Olav Tvete wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> >>  mkspecs/android-g++/qmake.conf
> > 
> > One suggestion regarding the name of the mkspec:
> > 
> > It's not unusual to have linux* masks in .pro files (at least not in
> > WebKit
> > ;-)
> > 
> > Would it perhaps make sense to rename the mkspec to linux-android-g++ to
> > emphasize the fact that at the heart it is still a Linux system we're
> > building
> > for?
> >
> > 
> 
> Linux is only the kernel, which can be changed if Google finds a better
> alternative, and is not required to build an Android application.
> The rest of the O.S. is Android. IMHO android-g++ is the right name 
> (just like blackberry-*-gcc), Because to build an application we need libs
> that are Android "specific" (they have their own libc implementation, etc),
> not the linux kernel.

Yet bionic tries to be glibc compatible'ish.

Changing the underlying kernel would be a major ABI break unless the new 
kernel comes with a compatibility layer (which would seem likely). But the day 
that happens I suggest we introduce a new mkspec ;)

Let's put it this way: linux-g++* is just as fuzzy as android-g++* in what it 
means. But we're not in the business of creating mathematical formulas, we're 
in the business of making life easier for software developers. If we can make 
it easier for people to port their app to Android, why don't we do it?


Simon



More information about the Development mailing list