[Development] Qt 6 buildsystem support requirements
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Sun Jul 22 17:20:27 CEST 2018
On Sunday, 22 July 2018 03:57:37 PDT Иван Комиссаров wrote:
> That’s it. You pointing too much attention to the Linux distros and
> maintainers, which is very important, but you are using wrong arguments.
> Give those maintainers a good tool and they will be happy. And the «good
> tool» is not the same as «tool has been used for at least 2 years». People
> has been using plain makefiles for decades, people has been using autotools
> for years. But i guess anyone agrees that autotools sucks.
You're right, "good tool" does not mean "tool has been used for 2 years". Yet
I stand by what I said: I want a good tool, but *need* experience. The point
of 2 years is not to let them fight out to figure out which ones is best. The
point is to make sure the kinks are ironed out and that people have dealt with
Have they figured out how to do debugging when things go wrong? Autoconf
produces a very detailed config.log; qmake does a similar one for qtbase, but
has the -d -d options that almost always explain to me how things were wrong.
CMake is a lot harder and I hate debugging it, but in the worst case I know
there are people I can turn to for help. I want to say the same for the tool
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
More information about the Development