On Dec 11, 2007 3:44 PM, Alan DuBoff <alan.duboff at sun.com> wrote: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007, Shawn Walker wrote: > > So are you saying that I can run an application built against a > > version of Qt that isn't built against stdcxx with a version of Qt > > that is built against stdcxx? > > Where will you get a version of QT that is built against Sun's library? > > It wouldn't be from our package. If you wanted to run someone elses > software, fine.
Who cares where I get it? The point is that until recently, if someone installed Qt on Solaris it was more than likely built against Sun's C++ libraries; not stdcxx. As a result, users that have applications will expect any version of Qt installed into the same "default location" that Qt normally installs into to not be built with stdcxx. > And please don't confuse what you perceive as Stefan's comments to support > Solaris 10 UX, because that was to build on it. I don't understand why you > keep dwelling on that point. Software needs to go into nevada *FIRST*. That makes no sense. "You can build on this version, but you can't run anything on it" -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
