[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
Harald van Dijk wrote: > On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 05:20:47PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: >> On Wednesday 21 June 2006 15:44, Stefan Schweizer wrote: >>> qt3 - enable optional qt3 support >>> qt4 - enable optional qt4 support >> That will be a mess to support in the long run. > > Why? Ditto. Can anyone explain why this is bad? I simply don't want QT 4 on my system at this time. Just like I don't want GTK+-1 on my system. Already I've had to start adding packages to package.use with -qt to avoid pulling in qt4 (right next to all my -gtk entries). I don't see how it helps anyone to have a single 'qt' flag that changes meanings depending on the package it's used with. Dan Meltzer wrote: > When do you propose qt4 hits make.defaults? When kde4 hits p.mask, > when it hits ~arch, or when it hits arch? When it hits arch I guess. KDE itself won't be affected by the flag since it's not an optional dependency, and anyone building packages with optional KDE support should be using the kde flag, not qt, so I don't really see how this is relevant. But anyone building packages with optional KDE support will be expecting them to work with the latest stable version. --de. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 05:20:47PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote: > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 15:44, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > > qt3 - enable optional qt3 support > > qt4 - enable optional qt4 support > > That will be a mess to support in the long run. Why? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On Wednesday 21 June 2006 15:44, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > qt3 and qt4 is being used there already and it is obvious It's "nice" to invent new use flags affecting Qt stuff without contacting those who care for Qt. > > > 2) A package requires either Qt3 or Qt4 (both not both?...such as > > x11-libs/qwt-5). > > qt3 - enable optional qt3 support > qt4 - enable optional qt4 support That will be a mess to support in the long run. Let's go with that what works better, prefer the latest version and be fine with it. I do agree with Caleb to use the qt use flag for the latest supported version and in cases it is really necessary to have an additional qt3 use flag. Carsten pgpK1ne4gh5sC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
> Caleb Tennis wrote: > qt3 - enable optional qt3 support > qt4 - enable optional qt4 support Maybe I just need a little time to warm up to this. :) Caleb -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
Stefan Schweizer wrote: > Why you ask? Because a user does not care if packageX uses qt3 or qt4, he > just wants to use it. > > But why do we have two useflags then? > Because the user should be able to disable optional support for either qt3 > or qt4 or both for every package. There's a significant enough use case for wanting only qt3 or only qt4 on your system that it might be worth considering it. >> I think we should, however, do our best to avoid a situation where we have >> some ugly combination of USE="qt -qt3" or USE="qt4 -qt qt3"... > > right you are. And since we already have a qt3 and a qt4 useflag in the tree > it is a good move to do this right. Agreed on this. So right now, we've got a couple of options. - Use case is user wants program with its best qt. USE=qt is an easy option. The other option is USE="qt3 qt4", and apps should always pick the best of the enabled qt versions if they are mutually exclusive. - Use case is avoiding installing either qt3 or qt4. Impossible with USE=qt, possible with USE="qt3/qt4". Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
Caleb Tennis wrote: > On Tuesday 20 June 2006 12:40, Stefan Schweizer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> with kde4 approaching and the new Qt-4 being in the tree we suddenly see >> the same problems that gtk had with the gtk2 flag again. > > I think there's a lot of good thoughts surrounding how to handle this. > There are 2 categories of packages we need to concern ourselves with: > > 1) A package can optionally add support for Qt3 or Qt4 (such as dbus). > qt3 and qt4 is being used there already and it is obvious > 2) A package requires either Qt3 or Qt4 (both not both?...such as > x11-libs/qwt-5). qt3 - enable optional qt3 support qt4 - enable optional qt4 support when both are possible its the maintainers decision, would look something like this: qt4? ( =x11-libs/qt-4* ) !qt4? ( qt3? ( =x11-libs/qt-3* ) Why you ask? Because a user does not care if packageX uses qt3 or qt4, he just wants to use it. But why do we have two useflags then? Because the user should be able to disable optional support for either qt3 or qt4 or both for every package. Disabling all optional qt4 support is only conveniently possible with a qt4 flag. Same for qt3. We need separate flags here, otherwise you can just use one flag for everything, it does not make sense to have two flags when one cannot be used because the other is ambiguous. > Solution: Build against qt4. If you want to provide the same package for > the qt3 version, add a new package to portage I suppose. This "add a new package to portage" is not really the gentoo spirit of following upstream tarballing, in my opinion. > In the end, this is just merely suggestion. I think each maintainer > should come up with the best way to handle the situation unless someone is > going to GLEP this. We have 36 qt-use-packages, so we could have 36 different flags in the end ;) Trying to reach a consensus on the mailing list is a better idea imo. > I think we should, however, do our best to avoid a situation where we have > some ugly combination of USE="qt -qt3" or USE="qt4 -qt qt3"... right you are. And since we already have a qt3 and a qt4 useflag in the tree it is a good move to do this right. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On Wednesday 21 June 2006 10:58, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > ok; so in gtk-land we have gtk2 to prefer the newer interface whereas > the proposal for qt/qt3 is to have a specific flag for the older > interface. I do prefer the qt/qt3 approach, even though it's > inconsistent with what happens on gtk. I don't suppose changing > gtk/gtk2 to gtk/gtk1 would be popular... Please don't talk about "interface", Qt is way more than interface as I said, so talking about frontends and interface is misleading. If it was just interface, of course it would be possible to choose the best between Qt4 and Qt3, but this is not an interface problem, it's a bindings problem. As I said, enabling just one between qt3 and qt4 in bindings would be like just having one of "pbindings" useflag, and every ebuild decides if it will provide python or perl bindings, just because they happen to start with 'P'. Qt3 and Qt4 are different enough to be considered different languages from some POVs, it does not make sense to treat Qt the exact same way of GTK, because it's not only a GUI thing. -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE pgp8jAcxCqUux.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 02:39:29 -0400 (EDT) "Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > > > Am I making sense? This looks a lot like the gtk/gtk2 flags, but > > inverted; according to use.desc, gtk builds gtk+-1 unless gtk2 is > > set, whereas the above builds highest version compatible with the > > package unless a lower version is specifically requested through > > USE. > > That's not what use.desc says gtk does. You just illustrated how > confusing the gtk/gtk2 use flag situation has been. > > The gtk use flag doesn't specify a version. It just says that the > package should build against *a* version of gtk+. The gtk2 flag was > a way to prefer the gtk2 interface over the gtk1 interface if a > package supported both. ok; so in gtk-land we have gtk2 to prefer the newer interface whereas the proposal for qt/qt3 is to have a specific flag for the older interface. I do prefer the qt/qt3 approach, even though it's inconsistent with what happens on gtk. I don't suppose changing gtk/gtk2 to gtk/gtk1 would be popular... > Thankfully, we've mostly moved past the gtk/gtk2 use flag mess now. > Let's try not to make it quite so hard for people with the qt toolkit. I think we're all agreed there :) So it's worth thrashing out properly. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
Caleb Tennis wrote: > I would personally like to stay with just the "qt" use flag. The use flag > will be for support of whichever version of Qt is supported (v3 or v4) for > the particular emerge. > > In the cases where more than one version is supported, it should be for > Qt4 only. The Qt3 version should be a separate emerge. For example, in > the case of the poppler bindings, there should be a poppler-bindings-qt3 > package. The problem here is that a user cannot just say at one point "I do not want any more qt3 packages on my system". He will need a big /etc/portage/package.use list to do it. That is the same problem I currently have with gtk1 - I would like to avoid it for qt. Considering we only have 36 packages [1] with a qt useflag it will be fairly easy to convert them to a qt3/qt4 version system that makes sense to everyone and allows easy enabling/disabling of only qt3 or qt4. [1] http://gentoo-portage.com/Search?search=&use=qt this scheme also allows some people to disable qt4 just with USE="-qt4" and mask it. Any optional qt4 interfaces wont be built then. With only a qt useflag this would require a package.use list again. Can we think about it again? 36 packages is less than half what currently still uses gtk1 in the tree. Doing it right for the users is better than doing it easy for the package maintainers. Thanks, Stefan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: Am I making sense? This looks a lot like the gtk/gtk2 flags, but inverted; according to use.desc, gtk builds gtk+-1 unless gtk2 is set, whereas the above builds highest version compatible with the package unless a lower version is specifically requested through USE. That's not what use.desc says gtk does. You just illustrated how confusing the gtk/gtk2 use flag situation has been. The gtk use flag doesn't specify a version. It just says that the package should build against *a* version of gtk+. The gtk2 flag was a way to prefer the gtk2 interface over the gtk1 interface if a package supported both. Thankfully, we've mostly moved past the gtk/gtk2 use flag mess now. Let's try not to make it quite so hard for people with the qt toolkit. Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
