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 :/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
