Laurent Rineau wrote:
> Do you suggest that the upstream project should have a different library
> name when it is compiled with Qt4 and Qt5?
Yes, see Rex Dieter's reply.
> Why is that better than the following suggestion:
>
> /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so -> libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1
> /usr/lib64/libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1
> /usr/lib64/Qt5/libQGLViewer.so -> libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1
> /usr/lib64/Qt5/libQGLViewer.so.2.5.1
Because that suggestion relies on rpath (yuck!), -L flags and similar hacks
to select the correct version. It also tries to establish a standard
"/usr/lib64/Qt5" that has no uptake from other packages, the other upstreams
are renaming their libraries (e.g., all the KDE ones, and even Qt itself).
The Qt 5 version should be something like:
/usr/lib64/libQGLViewer-qt5.so → libQGLViewer-qt5.so.2.5.1
/usr/lib64/libQGLViewer-qt5.so.2.5.1
(Please do not rename the Qt 4 version, for backwards compatibility.)
And the libQGLViewer-qt5.so name should really get upstreamed.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
