Re: QT6 build of ftinspect bit-rotten?
> I'll look into this after I resolved all backlog issues of ftinspect > (MM/GX default and PSName issue, UI bug in #26, and colored SVG > fonts). Great, and thanks in advance! Werner
Re: QT6 build of ftinspect bit-rotten?
Hi, sorry for coming late to the party :) Indeed, almost no Qt6 support is included in the current ftinspect version is introduced. I'll look into this after I resolved all backlog issues of ftinspect (MM/GX default and PSName issue, UI bug in #26, and colored SVG fonts). I would refer to softwares providing dual-version Qt support (e.g. OBS and qBitTorrent) for best practices on supporting both Qt 5 and 6. Theoretically, I didn't use any fancy feature of Qt (the QT_VERSION_CHECK was used for Unicode codec conversion, but the Qt6 sides are untested), and the current codebase only depends on basic QtWidgets components. Therefore, I foresee it a smooth migration. OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: QT6 build of ftinspect bit-rotten?
On Monday, 17 July 2023 at 05:52:36 BST, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > Btw, anybody done QT6 build of ftinspect lately?
> Well, looking into `src/ftinspect/{meson.build,CMakeLists.txt}` I only
> see build support for Qt5. Apparently, Qt6 support was tested
> experimentally only.
> Charlie, can you comment, please?
There are some conditionals "if QT_VERSION(6, 0, 0)" scattered through out the
code, and QT6 provides a qt5compat library, so I though I'll give it a try. The
qt6 support is WIP I guess. Maybe bombing out is better (ie where the API is
known to change, just bomb out with '#error "qt6 not yet supported"' ), but I
guess Charlie never foresaw somebody bypassing meson/cmake and try to build
ftinspect without using either :-).
Re: QT6 build of ftinspect bit-rotten?
> Btw, anybody done QT6 build of ftinspect lately?
Well, looking into `src/ftinspect/{meson.build,CMakeLists.txt}` I only
see build support for Qt5. Apparently, Qt6 support was tested
experimentally only.
Charlie, can you comment, please?
Werner
QT6 build of ftinspect bit-rotten? (Re: skeletal makefile for ftinspect (Re: Future of autotools)
Btw, anybody done QT6 build of ftinspect lately?When I was writing the makefile, I had to install some qt5*-devel packages. I did some qt3/qt4 stuff a long time ago, so I kept those, but uninstalled most of qt5-dev stuff when I see qt6 being installed as part of half-yearly upgrade. I am on gnome, so kde stuff is really around for occasional curiosity. I just checked kde is still qt5... and only about 2 GUI applications I use depends on QT6 libraries. Anyway, I see some QT6 compatibility code in ftinspect, but they seem to have gotten bit-rotten / still WIP? On Monday, 17 July 2023 at 00:22:05 BST, Hugh McMaster wrote: On Fri, 14 Jul 2023 at 00:49, suzuki toshiya wrote: > The pkg-config interface should take care of everything easily. Debian and > Ubuntu have the relevant qt5 pkg-config files. Other distributions should too. Does pkg-config give the information for the pathname of moc? (the original question by Hin-Tak was asking about the appropriate path to use moc command) In my understanding, pkg-config is primarily designed to provide the information to compile & link the libraries, not designed to provide the information about the binary executable commands. Extra information beyond the standard prefix, sysconfdir, libdir etc. is package dependent. In this case, Qt5Core.pc has a variable that provides the path to a directory containing binaries such as moc.
