On Sun, 18 Jan 2015, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Thiago Macieira wrote: >> The one requirement that came from the Qt Project was that the tools would >> not be renamed. > > And the one requirement that came from the distros was that the tools must > be renamed. This was made very clear from the beginning. All other solutions > are and will always be inherently flawed. > > You also never gave any convincing argument as to why you refused to rename > the binaries.
Distributors are going a great job creating Qt packages. But not everyone is using their distro's Qt. In fact, looking at our customers I'd say that most of them have their own Qt install somewhere on their disk. Possible several installations even. Renamed binaries won't cope with that variety. Our product relies on a --with-qmake switch or PATH for selection. Version detections follows wherever named. Renamed binaries won't help. Or even make our life harder as it needs to be. Harri. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
