[Development] Non-movable Qt build

Peter Kümmel syntheticpp at gmx.net
Fri Jan 4 12:45:12 CET 2013


On 04.01.2013 12:27, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 4 de janeiro de 2013 09.35.33, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> Isn't on Windows only PATH used to figure out which Dll to load?
>
> Correct.
>
>> Then
>> qt.conf in the same dir as QtCore/qmake should be enough on Windows, or
>> missed I something?
>
> You missed something. The question is: when running app.exe from a given
> directory, how do you tell Windows to load Qt5Core.dll or QtCore4.dll from a
> different directory?
>
> The only answer is what you gave above: change PATH. Because qt.conf isn't
> used at this point.

Still don't get it: when PATH is the only way to tell the app
which Qt dlls to load, why do we need to patch the dlls?
Or is PATH changed by app.exe before it loads the Qt dlls and has the
paths compiled in?

>
>> BTW, one thing which becomes at least more complicated by this binary
>> patching is the signing of a shared library. I don't know if it is
>> necessary (I only know that you can sign a dll in .NET), but I could
>> imagine some day it will be used, e.g. to verify a program only uses by a
>> specific build.
>> (I already see the discussions because of LGPL  )
>
> Since we're talking about LGPL, signing the library is unnecessary. And maybe
> even illegal, depending on your reading of the LGPL and how you consider that
> the GPLv3 applies.
>
> The Windows installers are signed, as a whole, to ensure that they weren't
> tampered with.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>



More information about the Development mailing list