> there always is a distro that uses old QT libs... Yes, but not always this "old" distro is the latest version of the major server one ;-).
But anyway, I know too little about Qt to comment on the topic whether there are new features in 4.3+ over 4.2 that are *really* needed for bat (or improving bat *significantly*). Being mostly a Windows guy actually, I just know that my last database applications (i.e. "business" like bat is, not "fancy DirectX10+" neither "advanced security") were built in 2008 to work on Windows 95 (among other versions of Windows -- up to Vista)... However, I admit that building bat statically is an option (specifically for Redhat it would probably mean just a "huge" rpm built by packagers, i386+x86_64). The problem here is that server distributions do provide updates (e.g. security) to system libraries sometimes, including Qt, but maybe for "statically built applications considered trusted" like bat it is not a critical issue. Alex Marc Schiffbauer wrote: > * Alex Ehrlich schrieb am 24.07.09 um 11:00 Uhr: > >> Hello, >> >> Maybe you find possible to keep bat working with Qt v 4.2? I really hope >> that bat does not use 4.3+ features extensively, and at least one >> widespread server distro (RedHat/CentOS latest v 5.3) uses 4.2 (4.2.1 >> currently). >> > > If you distro is too old then you could build qt statically into > bat. > > Otherwise you could never use new QT features because there always > is a distro that uses old QT libs... > > -Marc > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
