On Tuesday, 27 de September de 2011 10:03:17 [email protected] wrote: > This discussion about what to make a reference platform vs documented > platform seems to be specific to Linux (okay, maybe embedded too, but > discussion seems to be mostly about linux at this stage). I put it to the > list that this is precisely what the LSB is meant to address. Most of the > work has already been done to make Qt build against LSB 4.0 (by Harald > Fernengel and myself). Why not make LSB 4.0 the reference *and* documented > platform for linux? Then the only question is whether or not a particular > flavour of linux supports the LSB spec, and this is something that all the > major linux distros generally try to do. Yes, there will be the odd need > for a specific hack/fix to work around the occasional distribution-specific > deficiency or bug, but I'm only aware of one such case in order to make Qt > build against LSB 4.0. Qt5 would seem to be the perfect time to make LSB > 4.0 a tier 1 config/platform for Qt. > > Currently, I maintain a smallish patch set for each Qt release to make it > buildable with LSB (almost all the patches now are confined to webkit). I'd > be more than happy to work with others if there was interest in making LSB > 4.0 a tier 1 config/platform for Qt. Currently, I can only work on this as > my current role allows, so some help would be welcome. Granted, there are > some issues around OpenGL versions, but those are easily resolved by adding > an additional constraint that sits on top of LSB 4.0 (and which looks to be > getting addressed by upcoming LSB versions anyway). The only module I have > not yet built against LSB 4.0 is DBus, since it isn't part of the LSB, but > Thiago has already indicated in a previous response that providing the DBus > headers to Qt should be enough since it will try to load the QtDBus module > dynamically at run-time and still work fine if it can't be loaded.
Hello
I think Qt should build with the LSB, yes. But making it our reference
platform will not exactly work, as the LSB 4.0 is now several years out of
date. I can't get the details as the website seems to still be down related to
Linux Foundation's infrastructure downtime.
The LSB isn't meant to innovate in the area of support. It's meant to
standardise best practice across the industry. For that reason, it's always
behind in terms of support and will usually lag one year behind the state of
the art or more. When developing for the future, we need to look at what the
state of the art of everything else will be, not what Red Hat Enterprise Linux
and SUSE LInux Enterprise Server shipped in 2008. (And by "look at" I don't
mean "always use")
Take for example Wayland: when will it be available in the LSB for us to build
against?
Anyway, what we can do is provide documentation on what we require by using
the LSB as the baseline: it's LSB 4.0 plus these libraries upgraded and these
other libraries present.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
