Re: [Interest] Interest Digest, Vol 86, Issue 17
> This may or may not be an issue for you, but, AppImage is something of an inverted philosophy. It's not "one Deb to rule them all" which is how things were done in the past. Each AppImage is built specifically for the target I don't understand, I'm using AppImage for my software ( https://github.com/OSSIA/score/releases) and it works on most linux distros out there (ubuntu, fedora, arch, etc...). Best, Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 3:20 PM Roland Hughes wrote: > Alexander: > > Having burned multiple days with > https://github.com/probonopd/linuxdeployqt > > I need to warn you, it is only for simple applications which can compile > on Ubuntu 14.04 using a dated version of Qt. If you need a current > webengine or other current features you will be resoundingly disappointed. > If your application has plug-ins (be they browser or some other kind) the > tool isn't good at finding their library dependencies. They also refuse to > add a -include-lib-dir type switch were you could park all of the libraries > it missed so it could easily scoop them up. > > This may or may not be an issue for you, but, AppImage is something of an > inverted philosophy. It's not "one Deb to rule them all" which is how > things were done in the past. Each AppImage is built specifically for the > target. For us that was a complete show stopper. More than 90% of the > machines running the application globally have zero Internet connection. > One box, somewhere, does. It pulls down the package and installs on all of > the other machines via sneaker-net. Hardware and OS version vary wildly. > (At its Internet connection peak, 1 in 7 machines had Internet access. That > has since been reduced.) > > Don't know if you will be providing support or not, but, from a support > standpoint, you really have no idea what got delivered. > > What really floors me about the Linux world and even the Qt world with > respect to Webengine or plug-ins, is this desperate clinging to dynamic > linking. It was a bad idea which got worse over time. Take a look at the > current AppImage path. Rather than admit dynamic linking was a failed > experiment, they are now packaging entire dynamic libraries repeatedly. > > Back in the days of DOS, we only linked the functions we needed. Not the > entire 300+Meg library we didn't need. Only a tiny set of INT-21 and 3 > other INTs were expected to be provided by the OS. > > While some will find it useful, Snappy hasn't delivered on its promises. I > haven't spent enough time with Flatpak to say if it is taking the correct > approach or is simply more the same. > > Just my 0.0002 cents. Having recently walked this road. > > > On 11/16/18 10:52 AM, Alexander Dyagilev wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Windows we have windeployqt. > > > > On MAC - macdeployqt. > > > > On Linux - there is no tool for this ? Is there some convenient > > alternative way to copy all the required Qt files then (my project uses > > Quick Controls 2)? > > -- > Roland Hughes, President > Logikal Solutions > (630) 205-1593 > > http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com > http://www.infiniteexposure.net > http://www.johnsmith-book.com > http://www.logikalblog.com > http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog > http://lesedi.us > > ___ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] [ANN] UniqLogger a Qt-based logging library
ianal, but static linking is allowed, as long as you provide the object files to allow relinking. This seems to be a field of discussion, though... Alex Am November 17, 2018 5:51:38 PM UTC schrieb Francesco Lamonica : >Hello René, >license is indeed LGPL-2 and you can use the library in your commercial >product. >That sentence you mention is for some specific needs like static >compiling >in a commercial product that, iirc, is not permitted by lgpl. > >regards > >On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 6:01 PM René Hansen wrote: > >> Thank you for sharing Francesco! >> >> This seems confusing though, as LGPL is indeed free for commercial >use: >> >> "License is LGPL-2, if you need a commercial license, feel free to >contact >> us." >> >> >> /René >> >> On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 at 00:23 Francesco Lamonica > >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> I'd just want to announce the availability of the UniqLogger >library, >>> it's an open-source Qt-based logging library with multiple backends >( >>> file, colored console, network, db) that runs on many platforms >(linux, >>> win, macOS, iOS, android) >>> >>> You can grab a copy at http://github.com/netresultsit/uniqlogger >>> ___ >>> Interest mailing list >>> Interest@qt-project.org >>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest >>> >> -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] [ANN] UniqLogger a Qt-based logging library
Hello René, license is indeed LGPL-2 and you can use the library in your commercial product. That sentence you mention is for some specific needs like static compiling in a commercial product that, iirc, is not permitted by lgpl. regards On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 6:01 PM René Hansen wrote: > Thank you for sharing Francesco! > > This seems confusing though, as LGPL is indeed free for commercial use: > > "License is LGPL-2, if you need a commercial license, feel free to contact > us." > > > /René > > On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 at 00:23 Francesco Lamonica > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> I'd just want to announce the availability of the UniqLogger library, >> it's an open-source Qt-based logging library with multiple backends ( >> file, colored console, network, db) that runs on many platforms (linux, >> win, macOS, iOS, android) >> >> You can grab a copy at http://github.com/netresultsit/uniqlogger >> ___ >> Interest mailing list >> Interest@qt-project.org >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest >> > ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] [ANN] UniqLogger a Qt-based logging library
Thank you for sharing Francesco! This seems confusing though, as LGPL is indeed free for commercial use: "License is LGPL-2, if you need a commercial license, feel free to contact us." /René On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 at 00:23 Francesco Lamonica wrote: > Hi all, > I'd just want to announce the availability of the UniqLogger library, > it's an open-source Qt-based logging library with multiple backends ( > file, colored console, network, db) that runs on many platforms (linux, > win, macOS, iOS, android) > > You can grab a copy at http://github.com/netresultsit/uniqlogger > ___ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Interest Digest, Vol 86, Issue 17
Since switching to AppImage, our Qt application stopped having the majority of Linux distribution-specific deployment images and it's been mostly trouble-free. I can recommend it. It also does not require any kind of an internet connection. On Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 3:19 PM Roland Hughes wrote: > Alexander: > > Having burned multiple days with > https://github.com/probonopd/linuxdeployqt > > I need to warn you, it is only for simple applications which can compile > on Ubuntu 14.04 using a dated version of Qt. If you need a current > webengine or other current features you will be resoundingly disappointed. > If your application has plug-ins (be they browser or some other kind) the > tool isn't good at finding their library dependencies. They also refuse to > add a -include-lib-dir type switch were you could park all of the libraries > it missed so it could easily scoop them up. > > This may or may not be an issue for you, but, AppImage is something of an > inverted philosophy. It's not "one Deb to rule them all" which is how > things were done in the past. Each AppImage is built specifically for the > target. For us that was a complete show stopper. More than 90% of the > machines running the application globally have zero Internet connection. > One box, somewhere, does. It pulls down the package and installs on all of > the other machines via sneaker-net. Hardware and OS version vary wildly. > (At its Internet connection peak, 1 in 7 machines had Internet access. That > has since been reduced.) > > Don't know if you will be providing support or not, but, from a support > standpoint, you really have no idea what got delivered. > > What really floors me about the Linux world and even the Qt world with > respect to Webengine or plug-ins, is this desperate clinging to dynamic > linking. It was a bad idea which got worse over time. Take a look at the > current AppImage path. Rather than admit dynamic linking was a failed > experiment, they are now packaging entire dynamic libraries repeatedly. > > Back in the days of DOS, we only linked the functions we needed. Not the > entire 300+Meg library we didn't need. Only a tiny set of INT-21 and 3 > other INTs were expected to be provided by the OS. > > While some will find it useful, Snappy hasn't delivered on its promises. I > haven't spent enough time with Flatpak to say if it is taking the correct > approach or is simply more the same. > > Just my 0.0002 cents. Having recently walked this road. > > > On 11/16/18 10:52 AM, Alexander Dyagilev wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Windows we have windeployqt. > > > > On MAC - macdeployqt. > > > > On Linux - there is no tool for this ? Is there some convenient > > alternative way to copy all the required Qt files then (my project uses > > Quick Controls 2)? > > -- > Roland Hughes, President > Logikal Solutions > (630) 205-1593 > > http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com > http://www.infiniteexposure.net > http://www.johnsmith-book.com > http://www.logikalblog.com > http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog > http://lesedi.us > > ___ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest > ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
Re: [Interest] Interest Digest, Vol 86, Issue 17
Alexander: Having burned multiple days with https://github.com/probonopd/linuxdeployqt I need to warn you, it is only for simple applications which can compile on Ubuntu 14.04 using a dated version of Qt. If you need a current webengine or other current features you will be resoundingly disappointed. If your application has plug-ins (be they browser or some other kind) the tool isn't good at finding their library dependencies. They also refuse to add a -include-lib-dir type switch were you could park all of the libraries it missed so it could easily scoop them up. This may or may not be an issue for you, but, AppImage is something of an inverted philosophy. It's not "one Deb to rule them all" which is how things were done in the past. Each AppImage is built specifically for the target. For us that was a complete show stopper. More than 90% of the machines running the application globally have zero Internet connection. One box, somewhere, does. It pulls down the package and installs on all of the other machines via sneaker-net. Hardware and OS version vary wildly. (At its Internet connection peak, 1 in 7 machines had Internet access. That has since been reduced.) Don't know if you will be providing support or not, but, from a support standpoint, you really have no idea what got delivered. What really floors me about the Linux world and even the Qt world with respect to Webengine or plug-ins, is this desperate clinging to dynamic linking. It was a bad idea which got worse over time. Take a look at the current AppImage path. Rather than admit dynamic linking was a failed experiment, they are now packaging entire dynamic libraries repeatedly. Back in the days of DOS, we only linked the functions we needed. Not the entire 300+Meg library we didn't need. Only a tiny set of INT-21 and 3 other INTs were expected to be provided by the OS. While some will find it useful, Snappy hasn't delivered on its promises. I haven't spent enough time with Flatpak to say if it is taking the correct approach or is simply more the same. Just my 0.0002 cents. Having recently walked this road. On 11/16/18 10:52 AM, Alexander Dyagilev wrote: Hello, On Windows we have windeployqt. On MAC - macdeployqt. On Linux - there is no tool for this ? Is there some convenient alternative way to copy all the required Qt files then (my project uses Quick Controls 2)? -- Roland Hughes, President Logikal Solutions (630) 205-1593 http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com http://www.infiniteexposure.net http://www.johnsmith-book.com http://www.logikalblog.com http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog http://lesedi.us ___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
