qt4: make FHS-friendly (bug #196901)
bugs.michael at gmx.net
Fri Jun 30 12:12:50 UTC 2006
On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:36:22 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:51:45 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> >> Per
> >> http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/196901
> >> I'm planning on moving bits out of the traditional %_libdir/qt4. For
> >> packagers, the biggest difference(s) will be:
> >> libdir: %_libdir/qt4/%_lib/* -> %_libdir/*
> >> headerdir: %_libdir/qt4/include/* -> %_includedir/*
> >> as well as:
> >> datadir: %_libdir/qt4 -> %_datadir/qt4
> >> docdir: %_docdir/qt4-doc-%version -> %_docdir/qt4
> >> translationdir: %_libdir/qt4/translations -> %_datadir/qt4/translations
> > What will be moved? The 'qt4' hierarchy? Individual files? What happens to
> > the concept of co-existing Qt installations?
> %_libdir/qt4 (aka the qt4 heirarchy) will still exist, The main changes are:
> * shared libs will now be in %_libdir
> * header files will now be in %_includedir
> * noarch content will (largely) now live in %_datadir/qt4 instead.
What will $QTDIR, $QTLIB and $QTINC look like? Will your layout break
anything which uses $QTDIR/lib, $QTDIR/include and $QTDIR/bin? Or do
you try to fix that with symlinks?
> But the qt4 heirarchy (%_libdir/qt) will still exist, containing other
> arch-specific bits (binaries, plugins, etc...)
> This arrangement doesn't preclude having another parallel-installable
> qt4 somewhere else, but that's not ever much of a concern/priority, imo.
How about another parallel installable _other_ version of Qt? e.g.
Qt 3.x, Qt 2.x. What about namespace clashes?
> > Will these changes survive package movement into Core (i.e. when Qt 4.x
> > will appear in Core)?
> I'd assume so, but that would depend on who (continues) to maintain it
More information about the Fedora-maintainers