On Tuesday 11 December 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Exactly; but it seems the world is full of insanity. I was wanting to
> be certain that a version of Qt4 that was built against stdcxx would
> be named differently to prevent conflicts with "standard versions"
> that were not.
Maybe it comes down to this: *is* there any chance of a different bunch of
people wanting to install Qt libraries that are not the Qt libraries that we
are installing.
In other words, do we own the "Qt-based software stack" or not? If we own it,
we can say that it needs to be based on the STL we use.
There seems to be a fundamental level of not-getting-it-ness going on here
(wouldn't be surprising, I only do this Solaris stuff for a lark once the
BSDs are supported). I'm used to systems having *one* Qt installed, and
sharing it -- and in that context, I'm concerned about the impact that the
choice of STL has.
--
These are your friends - Adem
GPG: FEA2 A3FE Adriaan de Groot
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL:
<http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/kde-discuss/attachments/20071211/24916c4c/attachment.bin>
