[Qt-interest] [Mingw-w64-public] Rubenvb 4.6.1 (prerelease) x86_64 personal build

[K. Frank]

Hello Ruben!

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:34 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
<vanboxem.ruben at gmail.com> wrote:
> Op 9 mei 2011 00:16 schreef "K. Frank" <kfrank29.c at gmail.com> het volgende:
> ...
>> > On the other hand, why rebuild what you already have? Only reason would
>> > be
>> > optimization, but I wouldn't bother. You should be able to use the new
>> > GCC
>> > version to link the older libraries. Just use the new compiler for your
>> > current project, using prebuilt libs.
>>
>> My current "everyday" installation of Qt (and some other small libraries)
>> was built with a tdm mingw32 gcc build:
>>
>>   g++ --version:  g++ (TDM-2 mingw32) 4.4.1
>>
>> I just sort of assumed that I wouldn't be able to mix my current
>> (tdm 4.4.1) Qt libraries with code compiled with the new compiler.
>> Do I understand you correctly that they should be compatible?
>> (By the way, my tdm gcc uses sjlj exceptions.)
>
> Ah yes, I believe tdm uses the MinGW.org runtime, so compatibility between
> my mingw-w64 based toolchains and yours would not be guaranteed.

Thanks for the heads-up.  If and when I decide to upgrade, I will plan on
rebuilding Qt.

> ...
> I would like to upload my Qt
> Builds, but they are very hard, if not impossible to get relocatable.

I assume that by relocatable, you mean being able to move the Qt
installation from one location to another in the file-system directory
hierarchy.

Yes, this issue bit me once, and I ended up rebuilding Qt as the most
convenient solution.

I believe that there was a discussion on the Qt-interest list about this
(speaking from memory), and that the Qt developers' stance was that
this non-relocatability is a feature, and it didn't seems that there was
any likelihood it would be changed.  I honestly never understood the
reasoning behind this.

> Perhaps someone knows of a way better than the google code project which
> tried to get it right some time ago?

I seem to recall that in the list discussion, someone mentioned a tool
that relocates a Qt installation by editing the hard-coded path names
in the executables.

> How does Nokia make its SDK installer?

I also seem to recall someone saying that the Nokia installer worked
in essentially the same way as the above-mentioned tool: that the
executables had their hard-coded path names (or perhaps placeholders)
edited upon installation to descend from the desired root directory for
the installation.

Again, this is from memory -- sorry if this is bogus information.

I expect that a number of people would find it a valuable service, were
you to solve the relocation issue and make available your Qt builds.
(I know I would.)  But your gcc builds are already a huge contribution,
and probably the more important piece of the puzzle.

Thanks again for your contributions and all of your help.


K. Frank