On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 09:59:51AM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Tuesday 19 November 2024 08:29:40 Pacific Standard Time Alexandru Croitor > via Development wrote: > > > The previous Yocto LTS is still in 3.22 and customers like to stick to older > > versions (or are forced by HW vendors). > > Upgrading there is not quite that simple as it would affect every OS > > component as well, not just Qt builds. > > <rant> > Then don't upgrade Qt or buy hardware from better vendors. > > This is what I am questioning. Why Qt only, and not the rest of the OS? We've > had this discussion time and time again, though. > </rant> > > > I also think it would be nice if Qt 6.9 didn't have to be constrained by the > > old yocto lts version, but i'm waiting for confirmation from above whether > > it's very important for QtC. > > We still have the Debian stable problem, though. >
Doesn't the exact same logic apply here, though? Why upgrade Qt but not CMake? Given that you'll only have to upgrade CMake on the dev machines, whereas a verison of Qt that is newer than what is available by default on your OS will need to also be deployed to all target machines and/or to your users, this doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Why should one prioritize folks that want to use the bleeding edge version of a particular third-party library, yet can't be arsed to spend 5 minutes to compile a new version of CMake from source. Everyone able to compile Qt from source should have no trouble building CMake themselves either, so I don't get why libraries stay on ancient versions of CMake just because some users might not have a newer version by default. > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Principal Engineer - Intel DCAI Platform & System Engineering > -- > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
