Re: Qt5 on <= 10.6
Thank you, this reply from Ken answers the query about 10.6 Intel and early Qt5 usefulness: > Now I did get qt5.4 to build on 10.6, with moderate efforts, but it was not overly useful because by the time I did that, not much software would still build against qt5.4 anyway. On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 10:37 PM wrote: > On 7/29/23 at 6:51 AM, Sergio Had wrote: > > > Does Qt5 work on 10.5–10.6 Intel? > > > > It looks that at least earlier 5.x versions installed on 10.6: > https://ports.macports.org/port/qt53/stats > > Presumably that should be fixable for 10.5 and PPC. > > (I am not sure if 5.3 is of much use though – do developers of ports > depending on Qt5 support it still?) > > > > P. S. Given how much efforts it takes every time to fix something for > Qt4, even if it means just digging out a right version and reverting some > commits, I start asking a question if it is easier just to fix some early > 5.x version. There should not be anything arch-specific, it should be just > C++, I guess. Just find fallbacks for whatever misses in SDK, but if it > works on 10.6 Intel, it might be pretty feasible. > > > > https://trac.macports.org/ticket/64570 > > https://trac.macports.org/ticket/64932#comment:10 > > >
Re: Qt5 on <= 10.6
On Sat, 29 Jul 2023, Sergio Had wrote: Does Qt5 work on 10.5–10.6 Intel? It looks that at least earlier 5.x versions installed on 10.6: https://ports.macports.org/port/qt53/stats Presumably that should be fixable for 10.5 and PPC. (I am not sure if 5.3 is of much use though – do developers of ports depending on Qt5 support it still?) P. S. Given how much efforts it takes every time to fix something for Qt4, even if it means just digging out a right version and reverting some commits, I start asking a question if it is easier just to fix some early 5.x version. There should not be anything arch-specific, it should be just C++, I guess. Just find fallbacks for whatever misses in SDK, but if it works on 10.6 Intel, it might be pretty feasible. One shouldn't assume that Qt5 is a drop-in replacement for Qt4. At one point, I'd added an option to gpsd to allow building with Qt5, and it worked at the time I created it. But later on, something changed to break the build with Qt5, and I never tracked it down, so for now it's stuck on Qt4. This is unfortunate, since Qt4 seems to think that any processor that's not x86 must be ppc, so building against Qt4 on the M1 falls on its face trying to include ppc-specific code. The Qt4 build itself works, just not building gpsd against it. Fred Wright
Re: Qt5 on <= 10.6
On 7/29/23 at 6:51 AM, Sergio Had wrote: > Does Qt5 work on 10.5–10.6 Intel? > > It looks that at least earlier 5.x versions installed on 10.6: > https://ports.macports.org/port/qt53/stats > Presumably that should be fixable for 10.5 and PPC. > (I am not sure if 5.3 is of much use though – do developers of ports > depending on Qt5 support it still?) > > P. S. Given how much efforts it takes every time to fix something for Qt4, > even if it means just digging out a right version and reverting some commits, > I start asking a question if it is easier just to fix some early 5.x version. > There should not be anything arch-specific, it should be just C++, I guess. > Just find fallbacks for whatever misses in SDK, but if it works on 10.6 > Intel, it might be pretty feasible. https://trac.macports.org/ticket/64570 https://trac.macports.org/ticket/64932#comment:10
Qt5 on <= 10.6
Does Qt5 work on 10.5–10.6 Intel? It looks that at least earlier 5.x versions installed on 10.6: https://ports.macports.org/port/qt53/stats Presumably that should be fixable for 10.5 and PPC. (I am not sure if 5.3 is of much use though – do developers of ports depending on Qt5 support it still?) P. S. Given how much efforts it takes every time to fix something for Qt4, even if it means just digging out a right version and reverting some commits, I start asking a question if it is easier just to fix some early 5.x version. There should not be anything arch-specific, it should be just C++, I guess. Just find fallbacks for whatever misses in SDK, but if it works on 10.6 Intel, it might be pretty feasible.
