Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
Hello Rafael, I'm sorry for jumping into the discussione so late. On 26/01/2021 09:45, Rafael Sadowski wrote: Hi Qt4 lovers, qucs-s in the only Qt4 consumer left in our CVS tree. I have spoken with the maintainer and he told me that the port is actively used (not only from him). It looks like cad/qucs-s is the only functional GUI for SPICE-like simulators on OpenBSD. To be honest Qt4 applications are looking a little bit broken. Alessandro De Laurenzis has described this here: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=160733053308591=2 I see two options. Number 1: We say goodbye to Qt4/qucs-s and delete it. Number 2: We deactivate everything that is possible and not needed by qucs-s. This means that we have to live with the Qt4 issue. I will not invest any time. This is the real point, actually. As I described in [1], the same symptoms that I observe in qucs-s seem to affect qtconfig4, which is an integral part of the *library* (it would be good if someone could confirm this...) So, AFAICS, we have a broken qt4 subsystem at the moment; and, because of that, qucs-s is completely unusable. In these conditions, I don't see the point in keeping it into the tree. qucs-s is more than a GUI for SPICE-based simulators (ngspice in our case); it is a kind of integrated environment for circuital analysis and, in this respect, it is close to be a "unique" project. Without it, we have only a few alternatives in our ports: 1) kicad (and specifically eeschema): a bit bloated, if you ask me, but probably still usable; 2) xschem (for schematic capture only; it can also act as a very primitive simulator launcher). So, even it is my preferred solution, qucs-s isn't essential. But let me stress my point once more: either we preserve the qt4 subsystem (possibly limiting the tree content to what qucs-s strictly needs) and *actively maintain it*, i.e. investing time in bug fixing and/or patch back-porting from upstream, or we remove it completely, including qucs-s. My few cents [1] https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=160733053308591=2 -- Alessandro De Laurenzis [mailto:jus...@atlantide.mooo.com] Web: http://www.atlantide.mooo.com LinkedIn: http://it.linkedin.com/in/delaurenzis
Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 03:29:52PM +0100, Charlene Wendling wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:01:05 + > Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > On 2021/01/26 10:42, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > > I'd say put it on a diet > > > > +1 > > > > > and let's cross fingers that it's ported to Qt5. > > > > or Qt6 by the time it happens ;) > > > > they are working on it, gradually. > > > > The diet is the best compromise, it should save some time on the > macppc bulk cluster nonetheless, which is great :) Nothing to add from me other than that diet seems the most reasonable approach, so +1. >
Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:01:05 + Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2021/01/26 10:42, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > I'd say put it on a diet > > +1 > > > and let's cross fingers that it's ported to Qt5. > > or Qt6 by the time it happens ;) > > they are working on it, gradually. > The diet is the best compromise, it should save some time on the macppc bulk cluster nonetheless, which is great :)
Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
On 2021/01/26 10:42, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > I'd say put it on a diet +1 > and let's cross fingers that it's ported to Qt5. or Qt6 by the time it happens ;) they are working on it, gradually.
Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:31:43AM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 09:45:50AM +0100, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > > Hi Qt4 lovers, > > > > qucs-s in the only Qt4 consumer left in our CVS tree. I have spoken with > > the maintainer and he told me that the port is actively used (not only > > from him). It looks like cad/qucs-s is the only functional GUI for > > SPICE-like simulators on OpenBSD. > > > > To be honest Qt4 applications are looking a little bit broken. > > > > Alessandro De Laurenzis has described this here: > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=160733053308591=2 > > you know my stance: killing an app that's in use is bad. I'd say put it on a diet and let's cross fingers that it's ported to Qt5. -- Antoine
Re: Qt4 on diet or to hell
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 09:45:50AM +0100, Rafael Sadowski wrote: > Hi Qt4 lovers, > > qucs-s in the only Qt4 consumer left in our CVS tree. I have spoken with > the maintainer and he told me that the port is actively used (not only > from him). It looks like cad/qucs-s is the only functional GUI for > SPICE-like simulators on OpenBSD. > > To be honest Qt4 applications are looking a little bit broken. > > Alessandro De Laurenzis has described this here: > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports=160733053308591=2 you know my stance: killing an app that's in use is bad.
