Re: [Cooker] Qt2 in contribs?
Hi, Think it should be a good idea too... many apps still rely on Qt2 and it would be time saving to have built in support for this (ATI's Radeon control panel does). At least for the next year, depending on apps' migration rate, it would be a good choice for backward compatibility. Best regards, Jérémie Le Mercredi 4 Septembre 2002 00:08, Charles A Edwards a écrit : On Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:19:31 -0400 Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: various commercial apps (notably Opera) do use Qt3. Use the static version and you do not need a separate qt2. Charles -- Whatever it is, I fear Greeks even when they bring gifts. -- Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil) -- Charles A Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: [Cooker] Qt2 in contribs?
On Tue Sep 03 21:58 +0200, laurent Montel wrote: On Tuesday 03 September 2002 21:38, Levi Ramsey wrote: Would it be possible to include qt2 in contribs for 9.0? No Now all kde app use qt3/kde3.0, so it's not necessary to maintain a qt2 package. However, various commercial apps (notably Opera) do use Qt3. Including Qt2 on the commercial editions may be a good idea... -- Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] I was her love, she was my queen. And now a thousand years between. Linux 2.4.19-4mdklrr 5:15pm up 1 day, 2:55, 8 users, load average: 0.47, 0.47, 0.45
Re: [Cooker] Qt2 in contribs?
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:19:31 -0400 Levi Ramsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: various commercial apps (notably Opera) do use Qt3. Use the static version and you do not need a separate qt2. Charles -- Whatever it is, I fear Greeks even when they bring gifts. -- Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil) -- Charles A Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
Re: [Cooker] qt2 rebuild?
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, R.I.P. Deaddog wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Stefan van der Eijk wrote:
This shouldn't be difficult, using %{expand...} and %(...) .
But even when kdelibs-devel is installed, one may still want to
compile a bootstrapped qt2 again; perhaps it'd be better to leave
the decision to those who want to compile qt2 themselves.
There's a BuildConflicts: qt libqt2 in the package, which will prevent
kdelibs-devel (requried to build the desinger) from being installed. And
the package does produce qt2-designer... Weird. The BuildConflicts will
also need to be splitup into building designer / not building
designer... Why not just move the qt2-designer into a separate src.rpm
package?
Weird... may somebody tell me why there is need to use such a BuildConflicts?
Btw, I guess qt2-designer can not be so easily separated from qt2 main
package... haven't tried it myself though.
Well, when I was bootstrapping QT for my computer, I needed to compile it
twice - once with all KDE references disabled, and the second time rebuilt
for KDE (after rebuilding KDE of course). I did use Mandrake SRPMS btw
A BuildConflicts is -completely- rediculous in qt2.spec. QT doesn't seem
to have any conflict with a QT that's already present... at least as near
as I can tell *g*. Oh wait - a BuildConflicts that says no qt1-devel is
appropriate. qt1/qt2 aren't compatible (for devel).
Just in my uncultured opinion mind you
G'day, eh? :)
- Teunis
Re: Builds for alternative architectures [Re: [Cooker] QT2 i686]
Vadim Plessky écrivit : Sunday 10 December 2000 23:27, Geoffrey Lee ???: |By the way, does it make sense to have documentation header files |specified as "i586"? |IMHO, it should .noarch. | | Yes you are rgiht but IMHO you can't do that since if you do noarch the | whole package will be noarch, which is wrong! | There is no big problem at a moment, but I hope we will have Alpha and PowerPC ports some time later. It will be really stupid to have QT2-doc-xxx.i586.rpm, QT2-doc-xxx.alpha.rpm and QT2-doc-xxx.powerpc.rpm, as they are exactly the same docs. (same is valid for for -devel rpms) [...] qt2-doc no longer exist. Documentation have been merged in both future libqt2 and libqt2-devel packages (which are not yet uploaded). -- MandrakeSofthttp://www.mandrakesoft.com PARIS, FRANCE --David
Builds for alternative architectures [Re: [Cooker] QT2 i686]
Sunday 10 December 2000 23:27, Geoffrey Lee ???: |By the way, does it make sense to have documentation header files |specified as "i586"? |IMHO, it should .noarch. | | Yes you are rgiht but IMHO you can't do that since if you do noarch the | whole package will be noarch, which is wrong! | There is no big problem at a moment, but I hope we will have Alpha and PowerPC ports some time later. It will be really stupid to have QT2-doc-xxx.i586.rpm, QT2-doc-xxx.alpha.rpm and QT2-doc-xxx.powerpc.rpm, as they are exactly the same docs. (same is valid for for -devel rpms) And, I hope we will have AMD Athlons builds as well... (even if they are not officially supported by Mandrake I believe there is a group of enthusiasts which can handle it) Question will be again - what to do with QT2-doc-xxx.athlon.rpm ? It will just waste yours/mine HDD space if there is already i586 version on it. -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) http://kde2.newmail.ru/index_rus.html (Russian) Do you have Arial font installed? Just test it! http://kde2.newmail.ru/font_test_arial.html
Re: Builds for alternative architectures [Re: [Cooker] QT2 i686]
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Vadim Plessky wrote: There is no big problem at a moment, but I hope we will have Alpha and PowerPC ports some time later. It will be really stupid to have QT2-doc-xxx.i586.rpm, QT2-doc-xxx.alpha.rpm and QT2-doc-xxx.powerpc.rpm, as they are exactly the same docs. (same is valid for for -devel rpms) And, I hope we will have AMD Athlons builds as well... (even if they are not officially supported by Mandrake I believe there is a group of enthusiasts which can handle it) Question will be again - what to do with QT2-doc-xxx.athlon.rpm ? It will just waste yours/mine HDD space if there is already i586 version on it. 1. Why would you install an .i586 package if you installed you system as athlon? 2. QT2-doc-xxx.athlon.rpm and QT2-doc-xxx.i586.rpm can't coexists, since they have the same files. And if they did, it wouldn't take more place. 3. The -devel package sometimes include static libraries. seb
Re: [Cooker] QT2 i686
Yo. On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 10:23:02PM +, Vadim Plessky wrote: I uploaded QT-2.2-2 compiled for i686 architecture to my site: http://htmltests.newmail.ru/qt2-2.2.2-1mdk.i686.rpm Uploading speed was very low, so I was not able to upload qt2-doc and -devel But I guess they should be the same with i586 architecture. By the way, does it make sense to have documentation header files specified as "i586"? IMHO, it should .noarch. Yes you are rgiht but IMHO you can't do that since if you do noarch the whole package will be noarch, which is wrong! -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) http://kde2.newmail.ru/index_rus.html (Russian) Do you have Arial font installed? Just test it! http://kde2.newmail.ru/font_test_arial.html -- Geoffrey Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] §õªø· http://www.mandrakesoft.com/~snailtalk ftp://devel.mandrakesoft.com/pub/people/snailtalk $/usr/games/fortune Anything that can go wrong will go Segmentation Fault (core dumped) $
Re: [Cooker] qt2-devel
On Wed, 01 Nov 2000, Thomas M. Beaudry wrote: On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Christopher Molnar wrote: Anyway's, don't know why it didn't compile be default. I am recompling a fix right now and we will see if it works. Give me a few hours to get some testing with it done and I will upload to cooker. Don't know if it helps but a quick search on Alta Vista turned up similar complaints for all the other distributions so it's probably a make bug introduced by Troll Tech. Debian claims to have it fixed. Haven't checked as I try to avoid foreign packages if possible. Plus, I don't have time for taking their fix and integrating into Mandrake source except on the weekends. I have it compiled back in, but now I just need to get it to upload. It was real easy to add back to the rpm, the troll's makefile just didn't include it. -Chris
Re: [Cooker] qt2-devel
I have it compiled back in, but now I just need to get it to upload. It was real easy to add back to the rpm, the troll's makefile just didn't include it. Thanks. Now I'll be able to compile QtEZ again this weekend. -- Thomas M. Beaudry - k8la/ys1ztm [EMAIL PROTECTED] He's dead Jim. Grab his tricorder. I'll get his wallet.
Re: [Cooker] qt2-devel
Trying this question again. This is an essential peice of QT used for internationalization. On Wed, 01 Nov 2000, Thomas M. Beaudry wrote: What happened to msg2qm? I was trying to compile the latest version of QtEZ and discovered this file is missing. I have qt2-devel-2.2.1-3mdk. -- Thomas M. Beaudry - k8la/ys1ztm [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not tense, just terribly A*L*E*R*T!!
Re: [Cooker] qt2-devel
On Thu, 02 Nov 2000, Christopher Molnar wrote: Hello Thomas, Hello I am not ignoring you, it just takes me a while to get through close to 200+ emails (not to mention mailing list messages) in my inbox daily :-( Only 200 lol No such implication. Easy to miss one message in Cooker's volume. I forgot to copy you on the first message so resent with you copied. Anyway's, don't know why it didn't compile be default. I am recompling a fix right now and we will see if it works. Give me a few hours to get some testing with it done and I will upload to cooker. Don't know if it helps but a quick search on Alta Vista turned up similar complaints for all the other distributions so it's probably a make bug introduced by Troll Tech. Debian claims to have it fixed. Haven't checked as I try to avoid foreign packages if possible. Plus, I don't have time for taking their fix and integrating into Mandrake source except on the weekends. Later... -- Thomas M. Beaudry - k8la/ys1ztm [EMAIL PROTECTED] My inferiority complexes aren't as good as yours.
Re: [Cooker] qt2-2.2-0.1mdk binaries missing...
Jürgen Zimmermann wrote: the sources for qt2-2.2-0.1mdk have shown at the mirrors, but the compiled binaries have not. try: http://ftp.littlepenguin.org/RPMS/ -- Yours Sincerly, Christian Zoffoli ''~`` ( o o ) +---.oooO--(_)--Oooo.--+ | LittlePenguin H 1 L.U.G. http://www.littlepenguin.org | | PGP: ~czoffoli/czoffoli.asc | | | |.oooO [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | ICQ: 79364453 ( ) Oooo. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +-\ (( )-+ \_)) / (_/
Re: [Cooker] qt2-2.2-0.1mdk binaries missing...
Christian Zoffoli wrote: Jürgen Zimmermann wrote: the sources for qt2-2.2-0.1mdk have shown at the mirrors, but the compiled binaries have not. try: http://ftp.littlepenguin.org/RPMS/ ftp://ftp.littlepenguin.org/RPMS :) -- Yours Sincerly, Christian Zoffoli ''~`` ( o o ) +---.oooO--(_)--Oooo.--+ | LittlePenguin H 1 L.U.G. http://www.littlepenguin.org | | PGP: ~czoffoli/czoffoli.asc | | | |.oooO [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | ICQ: 79364453 ( ) Oooo. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +-\ (( )-+ \_)) / (_/
Re: [Cooker] qt2-2.2-0.1mdk binaries missing...
It's now .2mdk On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, [iso-8859-1] Jürgen Zimmermann wrote: the sources for qt2-2.2-0.1mdk have shown at the mirrors, but the compiled binaries have not. from ftp.sunet.se mirror: ftp cd SRPMS 250 CWD command successful. ftp dir qt2* 200 PORT command successful. 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls. -rw-r--r-- 1 ftpadm 7444509 Aug 7 23:39 qt2-2.2-0.1mdk.src.rpm [...] ftp cd ../cooker/Mandrake/RPMS 250 CWD command successful. ftp dir qt2* 200 PORT command successful. 150 Opening ASCII mode data connection for /bin/ls. -rw-r--r-- 1 ftpadm 2414795 Aug 8 05:31 qt2-2.1.1-11mdk.i586.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 ftpadm 6815832 Aug 8 05:31 qt2-devel-2.1.1-11mdk.i586.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 ftpadm859404 Aug 8 05:31 qt2-doc-2.1.1-11mdk.i586.rpm 226 Transfer complete. Moreover, I was not able to "--rebuild" the binary packages from the src.rpm, at least not on an up-to-date cooker installation... So long, Juergen -- --Chris
Re: [Cooker] qt2 = 2.2 is needed by kdelibs-1.92-12mdk
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, Bryan Paxton wrote: qt2 = 2.2 is needed by kdelibs-1.92-12mdk eh ? : ) it is, and it is on the mirrors. qt2-2.2-0.2mdk
Re: [Cooker] qt2 headers
Which RPM are you talking about? -devel or regular? - Original Message - From: "Anton Graham" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Mandrake Cooker" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 8:05 AM Subject: [Cooker] qt2 headers Is it just me or is the qglobal.h file missing from our RPM? -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
RE: [Cooker] qt2 headers
[glee@anakin qt2]$ rpm -qf qglobal.h qt2-devel-2.1.0-5mdk [glee@anakin qt2]$ fine with mine ...it is 5mdk because i removed removed the double install libqt instead i symlinked it. removed a couple of mb off my installation of qt2 :) oh and teh directory is qt2 becuase i am in /usr/include/qt2 :) it is a symlink to the one in QTDIR. -Original Message- From: Christopher Molnar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 8:28 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Cooker] qt2 headers Which RPM are you talking about? -devel or regular? - Original Message - From: "Anton Graham" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Mandrake Cooker" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2000 8:05 AM Subject: [Cooker] qt2 headers Is it just me or is the qglobal.h file missing from our RPM? -- _ _|_|_ ( ) *Anton Graham /v\ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] /( )X (m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541 Penguin Powered!
Re: [Cooker] qt2: BuildArchitecture restricition needed?
Chmouel, I'm wondering why there is a "BuildArchitectures" line in the qt2 spec file. BuildArchitectures: i586 Is this package only meant for the i586 architecture, or can it also be compiled on other architectures (alpha or i686)? If so, can we do without the line, or can we add the other architectures that it works on? Yes, normally we put i386 i586 k6 we can add alpha if supported. I understand, but isn't "BuildArchitectures" normally used to define an exclusive buildarchitecture for that package? For instance: wine can't be built on anything but the x86 platform. For this package it's usefull to add a "BuildArchitectures" string. If the package can be built on other platforms without any problems, why would a "BuildArchitectures" string be needed? Greetings, Stefan
Re: [Cooker] qt2: BuildArchitecture restricition needed?
On Sun, 21 Nov 1999, Stefan van der Eijk wrote: Chmouel, I'm wondering why there is a "BuildArchitectures" line in the qt2 spec file. BuildArchitectures: i586 Is this package only meant for the i586 architecture, or can it also be compiled on other architectures (alpha or i686)? If so, can we do without the line, or can we add the other architectures that it works on? Yes, normally we put i386 i586 k6 we can add alpha if supported. I understand, but isn't "BuildArchitectures" normally used to define an exclusive buildarchitecture for that package? For instance: wine can't be built on anything but the x86 platform. For this package it's usefull to add a "BuildArchitectures" string. If the package can be built on other platforms without any problems, why would a "BuildArchitectures" string be needed? Greetings, Stefan If it's removed you get a bunch of noarch.rpms, or don't get the one noarch.rpm I've forgotten which is the case but it's one of the above :) -- MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/ --Axalon
Re: [Cooker] QT2
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, you wrote: Eddy Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Has anyone managed to make the QT2 in Cooker compile anything? I've had absolutely no luck so far. what program do you use ? I use this : MOC=/usr/bin/moc2 QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt2/ ./configure --* I see that you don't run Mandrake yourself as there is no /usr/lib/qt2 when I have it installed.. qt2 is located within /usr/lib .. Michael Irving
Re: [Cooker] QT2
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
Michael Irving [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I use this :
MOC=/usr/bin/moc2 QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt2/ ./configure --*
I see that you don't run Mandrake yourself as there is no /usr/lib/qt2 when I
(root@kenobi)[/RPMS]-# rpm -qpl --changelog qt2-devel-2.0.1-6mdk.i586.rpm |head -40
[...]
* Tue Jul 27 1999 Chmouel Boudjnah [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- First version for Mandrake distribution
sure i don't run mandrake but i have do the package.
have it installed.. qt2 is located within /usr/lib ..
Humm back to office maybe you can compile like this :
CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fexceptions -frtti" CC=%{compiler} ./configure \
--prefix=%{kdeprefix} \
--with-install-root=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT \
--with-pam \
--with-qt-includes=/usr/include/qt2
make MOC="/usr/bin/moc2"
Sorry.
--
MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Chmouel
Telling ./configure all the right dirs works ok but when it tries to compile an X-QT
library test program it doesn't work. I'm trying the latest Kvirc on this.
Eddy Cooper
Re: [Cooker] QT2
Eddy Cooper wrote:
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
Michael Irving [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I use this :
MOC=/usr/bin/moc2 QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt2/ ./configure --*
I see that you don't run Mandrake yourself as there is no /usr/lib/qt2 when I
(root@kenobi)[/RPMS]-# rpm -qpl --changelog qt2-devel-2.0.1-6mdk.i586.rpm |head -40
[...]
* Tue Jul 27 1999 Chmouel Boudjnah [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- First version for Mandrake distribution
sure i don't run mandrake but i have do the package.
have it installed.. qt2 is located within /usr/lib ..
Humm back to office maybe you can compile like this :
CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fexceptions -frtti" CC=%{compiler} ./configure \
--prefix=%{kdeprefix} \
--with-install-root=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT \
--with-pam \
--with-qt-includes=/usr/include/qt2
make MOC="/usr/bin/moc2"
Sorry.
--
MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Chmouel
Telling ./configure all the right dirs works ok but when it tries to compile an X-QT
library test program it doesn't work. I'm trying the latest Kvirc on this.
Eddy Cooper
Eddy why don't you install the static binary version of kvirc, I am using it!
kvirc-1.0.0-beta3.1=i386.tar.gz
With this version you don't need the QT2 library!
Szymon Stefanek Mon Oct 04 1999
###
This package contains the statically linked ELF binary version of
KVIrc-1.0.0-beta 3.1 for intel 386 machines.
The source code for this release is available at http://www.kvirc.org
Sergio Korlowsky
Re: [Cooker] QT2
Sergio Korlowsky wrote:
Eddy Cooper wrote:
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote:
Michael Irving [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I use this :
MOC=/usr/bin/moc2 QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt2/ ./configure --*
I see that you don't run Mandrake yourself as there is no /usr/lib/qt2 when I
(root@kenobi)[/RPMS]-# rpm -qpl --changelog qt2-devel-2.0.1-6mdk.i586.rpm |head
-40
[...]
* Tue Jul 27 1999 Chmouel Boudjnah [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- First version for Mandrake distribution
sure i don't run mandrake but i have do the package.
have it installed.. qt2 is located within /usr/lib ..
Humm back to office maybe you can compile like this :
CXXFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fexceptions -frtti" CC=%{compiler} ./configure \
--prefix=%{kdeprefix} \
--with-install-root=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT \
--with-pam \
--with-qt-includes=/usr/include/qt2
make MOC="/usr/bin/moc2"
Sorry.
--
MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/
--Chmouel
Telling ./configure all the right dirs works ok but when it tries to compile an
X-QT
library test program it doesn't work. I'm trying the latest Kvirc on this.
Eddy Cooper
Eddy why don't you install the static binary version of kvirc, I am using it!
kvirc-1.0.0-beta3.1=i386.tar.gz
With this version you don't need the QT2 library!
Szymon Stefanek Mon Oct 04 1999
###
This package contains the statically linked ELF binary version of
KVIrc-1.0.0-beta 3.1 for intel 386 machines.
The source code for this release is available at http://www.kvirc.org
Sergio Korlowsky
Oh...oops...I didn't even notice that one on the page. Excellent. I'm still gonna
need
QT2 for licq but I think I'll just try and build it from source and see what happens.
Eddy Cooper
