[blfs-dev] Missleading text in QT4

Armin K. krejzi at email.com
Thu Dec 5 15:20:22 PST 2013


On 5.12.2013 22:29, Thomas Trepl wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 4. Dezember 2013, 15:56:15 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
>> Thomas Trepl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There is a sentence
>>>
>>> "If also installing Qt5 into /usr, symlink the Qt4 executables into
>>> /usr/bin by running the following commands as the root user: "
>>>
>>> followed by the instruction to create symlinks. I find that a bit
>>> missleading as it sounds like the symlinks are not required if I do not
>>> go to install Qt5. Do you read that in that way also?
>>>
>>> I think that the author want to point out that the suffix "-qt4" is
>>> required when installing Qt5 because the binaries would be overwritten
>>> than. But the symlinks to /usr/bin (with or without the suffix) are
>>> required anyhow.
>> No matter how you phrase it, loading both Qt4 and Qt5 into /usr/bin is a
>> kludge.  There are programs with identical names but different
>> functionality in both versions.  The better way, IMO, is to install both
>> in separate directories and just manipulate PATH to select the one you want.
>>
>> Note that this does not apply to running applications as there is no
>> naming collision with the library names.
>>
>>     -- Bruce
>
> I totally agree.  My point was that the text suggests (at least to me) that
> the creation of the symlinks is not required when not going to install QT5.
> Thats not true, they need to be created anyway.
> When leaving out the symlink creation, the binaries cannot be found because
> they are only in /usr/lib/qt4/bin but this dir is not in $PATH.
>
> --
> Thomas
>

Nah, that's where qtchooser comes in. If you are installing in /usr, 
then qtchooser is required (and provides qmake, uic, rcc, etc), which I 
did set as such. But explain that to someone who cares only for what he 
says :/



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list