Konstantin Ritt wrote:
> As a developer, I would rarely use the only Qt version provided by the
> distro. In fact, I currently have 8 different Qt-5 builds (partially
> because of some projects are sticking to some particular Qt-5
> version/configuration/etc.)
In practice, using the latest works in >99% of the cases, due to upstream's
backwards compatibility guarantees.
I develop everything against the system Qt (which is regularly updated in
Fedora), and in those cases where I need to check that it works with some
older Qt too, I simply build it in a CentOS chroot with the "mock" tool
(either by just packaging it as an RPM and throwing that to mock (one-line
invocation), or by scripting a manual build in mock).
> Having just a "qmake-qt5" solution doesn't fit my purposes; adding some
> freaky suffixes is not an option either.
But surely setting PATH to /opt/yourqt/bin:$PATH would work for you? What's
the point of qtchooser?
> As for Qt-4 and the qmake name clash, I *never* had a problem with
> building against a wrong Qt version, simply because I have a separate
> configuration for my Qt-4 builds.
I have all of qt3-devel, qt-devel (Qt 4) and qt5-qtbase-devel installed on
my system, and they just work, thanks to suffixed binaries. So I don't need
a "separate configuration". (What would that even be? Different user
account? Different chroot? Different VM? None of those are needed here.)
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
