[Development] Future of QBS
denis.shienkov at gmail.com
Fri Oct 13 18:55:26 CEST 2017
Hi all, my 5-cents:
QBS is better (best best) than CMake, IMHO, as CMake is too complicated. :)
QBS needs still in BinaryFiles support (e.g. to allow todo patching, merge
for some output
files using custom algorithms), better QtC integration (e.g. with Android
In other things QBS is very flexible, e.g. I have used it for creation of
Installers (for Windows), packing to archives, adding of additional rules
for creating of HEX,
MAP and so forth 'post build' things, and more more others (include
compiling a projects
for bare-metal architectures, e.g. AVR and so on). I don't know is it
possible to do it with
CMake with same as it simple in QBS (because CMake it is hell, IMHO).
Besides, AFAIK, Qt has the wip/qbs branch, where it builds with QBS instead
2017-10-13 18:30 GMT+03:00 Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen at qt.io>:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 04:19:51PM +0100, Sergio Martins wrote:
> > On 2017-10-13 16:12, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > On Friday, 13 October 2017 07:56:47 PDT Sergio Martins wrote:
> > >> IMHO the qt-project is not in a position to reject Qt building with
> > >> qbs, simply because there's no other implementation, nobody is
> > >> going to port Qt to CMake (if you disagree start a new thread).
> > >
> > > There are volunteers to do that. They just need to know when they
> > > could start doing the work to make a proof of concept.
> > Good to know Thiago. I'd say they should ask on the mailing lists
> > instead of waiting.
> it already has been. we (the current maintianers of the qt build system,
> and really anyone with a grain of taste) are strongly biased against a
> cmake-based solution. in fact, we have rejected a cmake-based port of qt
> creator some years ago.
> ps: there is a qbs-specific mailing list (this is specifically not
> applicable to the above topic, but that's just a tangent to start with).
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Development