Hi, On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 at 12:30, Helmut Grohne <hel...@subdivi.de> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 10:58:44AM +0100, Salvo Tomaselli wrote: > > I use this in my rules when using qt6 > > > > > > %: > > dh $@ > > > > override_dh_auto_configure: > > ln -s /usr/bin/qmake6 ./qmake > > PATH=`pwd`:$(PATH) dh_auto_configure > > > > override_dh_auto_clean: > > $(RM) qmake > > dh_auto_clean > > This is also being used in src:explosive-c4 now and the approach breaks > cross compilation. Please stop doing this, we'll have to touch all of > these. > > Still the use case is real and we need a better way to build packages > with qmake6. I was talking with Sune and Lisandro on IRC and their > consensus seems to have been that qtchooser and QT_SELECT are dead and > should not be used for Qt6. They suggested that we add add a new > --buildsystem to debhelper. We already have qmake_qt4 and qmake, why not > have qmake6? While changing QT_SELECT from qt5 to qt6 would be > convenient, changing it to "dh $@ --buildsystem qmake6" is easy enough, > no? The qmake6 build system can reuse qmake just like qmake_qt4 and > doing it that way immediately makes cross compilation just work (since > we already have <triplet>-qmake6). Lisandro requested naming it qmake6 > rather than qmake_qt6. Even though this breaks consistency with earlier > use in debhelper, the similarity to how upstream calls it more > important. > > Salvo and Alexandre, do you second this? > > Can I also get some ack from Qt maintainers such that we can move > forward in consensus?
+1 from me. qtchooser is no longer supported for Qt >= 6, so going this way is just awesome. -- Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer https://perezmeyer.com.ar/
