On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 6:57 PM, Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Stephen Kelly >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Is anyone working on, or have, a DeployQt5 or a generalized DeployQt4? >>>> We use it in our packaging process, and it is one of the last things I >>>> need to switch to Qt 5. If not, I was going to take a look at this, >>>> and see what I can put together. >>> >>> I've never used DeployQt4 or BundleUtilities, and I don't know much about >>> Mac (which BundleUtilities seems to strongly relate to somehow), so I >>> don't know what is needed from a DeployQt5, which is why I haven't >>> written such a thing yet. It seems like something that should be >>> versioned with and shipped with Qt 5. >> >> It was contributed by Mike McQuaid (from KDAB too I think). > > I think he first contributed it before joining KDAB, but now he's at Github: > > https://github.com/blog/1711-mike-mcquaid-is-a-githubber > I even read that, but didn't put it together in this context ;-) > >> How are >> you currently packaging Qt application binaries on Windows, Linux and >> Mac? > > Generally it's not me personally doing that stuff, but colleagues. Those > colleagues don't have 'make it pure' as a goal, are not interested in cmake > generally, but just need to get that part done, and need to do something > else instead.
Fair enough, we are really aiming for the simplest way to reliably package on all three platforms and this has been working pretty well. > >>> * It seems to have macros related to plugins. When using a statically >>> built Qt, plugins are also relevant in the buildsystem because I need to >>> compile them into my application. Should there be one generic interface >>> in CMake for both this kind of thing and what DeployQt4 is doing? >> >> Perhaps, but I am most concerned at this point with the simplest way >> of porting the remaining part of the build system. > > Yes, I understand that. > > http://cmake.3232098.n2.nabble.com/DeployQt5-cmake-td7585218.html > > shows that it can be done in a straightforward way. I missed that in my searches - thanks for pointing it out. > >> I would prefer >> something like DeployQt4 for simplicity, and not requiring me to bump >> my Qt dependency to 5.3 for packaging, so in the short term at least I >> would like to offer similar functionality for Qt 5 in a CMake helper. > > It seems that you can do something simple for your current need and get > something modern into Qt 5.3, if it makes sense to do something different > from 'something simple'. > >> The new Qt 5 CMake support seems really strong, but I was left >> wondering what I should do for packaging. > > Yes. The intersection of experience, knowledge, time etc hasn't appeared to > add something that makes sense yet. I would be happy to help here if I can, I want to ensure Qt 5 is at least as simple as Qt 4 was to create packages using CMake. > > I know that Digia are working on some deployment stuff with unification of > concepts particularly with regard to embedded systems deployment in mind. I > don't want to create too many diverging concepts there, and would prefer to > see what comes out of that, or at least understand the thing fully, before > committing to something in the cmake files shipped with Qt 5. > Agreed, I will keep an eye out for this. In the short term is would seem an adaptation of DeployQt4 is reasonable, unless I hear from someone else that they have something way better working already. Thanks, Marcus -- Powered by www.kitware.com Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
