Re: On the matter of Qt packaging
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 01:01:15PM +0100, Ralf Nolden wrote:
> The wisest thing to do IMHO is to prepare qt3 in a way that it works best
> inside /usr/lib and /usr/bin while qt2, qt2e should be adapted and reworked
> so they can still be used in parallel. That means, that sooner or later one
> must find an agreement to use something like a QTDIR for those packages.
> Martin got convinced now to use /usr/share/qt3 now for qt-x11-free-3.1.1, so
> I would suggest /usr/share/qt2 for Qt 2.x, /usr/share/qt2e for Qt-embedded
> 2.x and /usr/share/qt3e for Qt-Embedded 3.x.
Use /usr/bin/moc-qt2 with a link from /usr/share/qt2/bin/moc.
You could make /usr/bin/moc a script wich the administrator and user
could configure to point to the moc version he prefers.
Something like
$ echo qt2 > $HOME/.debian-qt
$ moc
executes moc-qt2 with QTDIR sat to /usr/share/qt2.
Administrator could set a default option in /etc/qt-debian or
something.
Just a thought. Anyway ...
> When it comes to the qt2 designer, which seems to be the only exception that
> it *must* be available in /usr/bin, a renaming to qt2designer and an
> appropriate desktop file/menu entry + README addendum should fulfill the
> requirements. Renaming moc and uic is probably not possible because
> buildscripts will always pick up on moc and uic and nothing else. Packagers
> must be aware of that build scripts will primarily search in QTDIR/bin for
> those tools, so I think moving the qt 2 tools to there only solves most
> issues for packagers and developers.
... no binaries in /usr/share.
--
Peter Mathiasson, peter at mathiasson dot nu, http://www.mathiasson.nu
GPG Fingerprint: A9A7 F8F6 9821 F415 B066 77F1 7FF5 C2E6 7BF2 F228
Reply to: