Re: Qt Changes ahead - Info for package maintainers + developers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Dienstag, 11. Februar 2003 11:27, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > On Montag, 10. Februar 2003 16:51, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > > > Qt 3 development requires (or should require) libqt-mt.so, Qt 2
> > > > development is using libqt.so.
> > >
> > > Are you sure?
> > > IMHO both libqt.so and libqt-mt.so can be used by Qt3 developers.
> > > First is for threadless apps, second for threaded.
> >
> > Yes, but you should *always* use libqt-mt. That is because if you run
> > KDE this library is already loaded and the application will pick up the
> > style set in KDE, so it's the best thing to link against for the user
> > experience.
>
> I know at least one case when linking against pthread is not acceptable.
> It is when use any other threading library than libpthread.
> E.g. we often use home-made non-preemptive thread library because it better
> fits our needs than pthreads. It is absolutely incompatable with pthreads
> and if linked together will cause segfault on any 'new' (or 'malloc')
> operator.
> I guess (but I am not sure) that using of alternative thread libs such as
> NGPT will also cause problems.
Well, then you have to stick with the non-threaded version if your app is a Qt
app. We're not speaking of throwing the non-threaded version away but more
about making any application that links against Qt to use qt-mt instead of qt
whereever possible. Your argument about other threading libs is a quite valid
one but also I think the only exception that is valid technically.
Ralf
- --
We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf Nolden
nolden@kde.org
The K Desktop Environment The KDevelop Project
http://www.kde.org http://www.kdevelop.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+SNEku0nKi+w1Ky8RAlLoAJ0USDWqS5G9imZdI/rwrbFIVOg3XgCcCzF3
2bj48N1RXa2oVLDDJgl66E4=
=eSV3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: