Hi, Am Dienstag, 9. Juni 2020, 12:07:02 CEST schrieb Bogdan Vatra via Development: > I'm using qmake for Qt6 when I'm doing Android work, also for this reason. > I don't want to build Qt twice just to use a "cool and superior" build system. > > Just out of curiosity, can some pretty please remind me what are the > advantages of using cmake to build Qt over qmake? > I'm not talking about Qt users, for them we should support all (major) build > systems: qmake, cmake, meson, etc.
It seems we have quite different use-cases and workflows because I actually understood that as a useful change - especially the part that Qt no longer weirdly builds for two target (host and actual target) in one go, see my comment here: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/mingw-w64-qt5-base/#pinned-750114 Additionally: When building only for one target at a time it is always clear to which target compiler flags, linker flags, dependency lookups and so on apply. That removes a lot of complexity from the build system. So far I'm building qmake, bootstrapping libraries and other tools for i686- w64-mingw32, x86_64-w64-mingw32, x86_64-linux-android, arm-linux-androideabi and aarch64-linux-android and in the future maybe for even more targets. In Qt 6 I will be able to save built time on all of these targets by simply making use of the host version of Qt. That sounds like a clear win since the host version of Qt should be available on all platforms I possibly want to build for these targets. The multi-ABI build for Android looks more like a hack to workaround having to build host tools multiple times. It comes with the disadvantage of making the build process more complex. Features which work for other targets like using system provided libraries instead of the bundled ones are likely problematic due to that. At the same time it is limited to Android and not a generic feature. If the goal is to make one Android package which contains binaries built for different targets: Why not simply let androiddeployqt pick up these binaries from different builds? Just allow one to pass multiple install directories/prefixes for these libraries at a time. That sounds way simpler and would also work for other dependencies a project might have besides Qt. Best Regards Marius _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
