On 11/04/2015 12:30 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: > JuuS wrote: >> On 11/04/2015 09:48 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote: >>> When building the IDE you'd normally use make bigide or similar which >>> would use the platform defaults, but depending on what libraries etc. >>> were available you could also use e.g. make LCL_PLATFORM=qt bigide >>> >> Hi, >> >> This question / discussion is also very interesting to me (warning >> possible dumb questions ahead). >> >> I am still very vague on the widget type/set in my gnu/linux education. >> I'm kub14.04, the ide then uses gtk2, all automatic. > > If that's Kububtu, I'd expect it to be using KDE which implies you've > already got Qt. Assuming that you have- or can add- libqt4pas-dev then > you can build the Lazarus IDE etc. for Qt. >
Ahhhh. Thank you for the insight! Yes, I can now compile qt as well as gtk2. So simple!!...when you know what is needed... >> But my questions are: >> >> Why would I want to use qt, gtk3, etc? Yes, of course for different >> platforms but which platforms (Fedora? Debian? ?? ). > > Depends massively on the version of whichever distro you've selected, > since these will typically bundle different versions of Gnome and it's > this that drives GTK forwards. I'm sure you've seen Torvalds' rants on > the issue. > > It also depends on the version of Lazarus you're using since of > necessity this tracks GTK and Qt, and to a much lesser extent on the > version of FPC for the same reason. > > In general, Debian "Lenny" is OK for GTK and GTK2. Debian "Squeeze" and > "Wheezy" are OK for GTK2 and Qt. My experience with Lazarus "Jessie" is > that Qt is somewhat more reliable than GTK, although I'm sure I'll take > flak for saying so. > > Can't remember where I've got to with "Stretch". Recent versions of > Lazarus have started making demands of Qt that are no longer satisfied > by the one with "Squeeze". > >> Does this mean then that what I have developed in gtk2 will ==NOT== run >> properly in some gnu-L flavours? Which ones? How do I tell? > > Yes. Pass. Badly. > >> I guess setting up VMs for my targets is a good solution to find out if >> there is a problem but I can't always tell which widgetset is right for >> which flavour...? >> >> I have googled this before but have found nothing that has enlightened >> me. > > The first problem to solve is pairing up which version of FPC works best > with a given version of Lazarus. After experimentation, I've got > > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.24+2.2.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.26+2.2.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.28+2.4.0 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-0.9.30+2.4.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.0.0+2.4.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.0.0+2.6.0 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.0.8+2.6.2 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.0.14+2.6.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.2.6+2.6.4 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-1.4.2+3.0.0 > /usr/local/bin/lazarus-gtk1-compatible > > The last of those is actually 0.9.24.1 with FPC 2.2.4, which is about as > old as is viable. I can't say without significant digging in my build > scripts which of those are also good for Qt. I really can't say which > are good for different versions of Windows (except that if you really do > have to build for NT you'll need something like 0.9.26.2 + 2.2.4) or for > OS X. Anybody into SPARC Solaris should find 1.4.2 + 3.0.0 OK. > > The best thing to do, in my opinion, is to build as many variants of > your binary as possible for a given platform, and then find out what > doesn't work. To try to keep that doable I've got a script set up which > points each of the combinations listed above at its own configuration > file, so that I don't find myself chasing shadows because the underlying > FPC version is suddenly wrong. > -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus