On Monday, 17 June 2019 01:14:50 PDT Elvis Stansvik wrote: > Hm, what is the problem with using the official CMake binaries? Isn't > that what you'd do on Windows / macOS anyway?
No. On macOS, you'd use Homebrew. That means it's "distro-packaged" too. On Windows, I don't know. I'd personally continue to use msys2, which means I am also getting a package. > If distro X (e.g. *buntu 20.04) happen to ship a sufficient version > when it arrives, then great. But having to install the build tool from > the vendor instead of the distro package manager surely can't be a > blocker? It is, on Linux. Going outside of your distribution methods means you're not getting updates. CMake is probably not high-risk software component, but I'd rather not have to remember I built an outside copy. That's different from Qt itself, since I am *developing* Qt. I have no interest in developing CMake. Or PCRE2. Or libjpeg and libpng, which *are* high-risk security vectors. So, yes, we should strive to ensure the distro-supplied SW is sufficient to build Qt. Exceptions are possible, but they need to be justified, like we did for PCRE when we began using it in 5.0. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
