[KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Jeremy Whiting jpwhiting at kde.org
Thu Oct 22 20:43:50 UTC 2015

Yeah, if we go that direction on mac it would be fine for bundled Qt,
but not for shared Qt. It would make all applications that use qt5-mac
or qt5-kde or whatnot use linuxy paths or not. It's a runtime switch,
so not very helpful if you've installed stuff to linuxy paths and then
let the user choose to toggle it and fail to find all the resources
needed. It sounds like a good solution for embedding a copy of Qt next
to each application for windows use (and maybe for osx use too if
resources don't make it completely unneccessary), but not for the
macports shared Qt case.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:37 PM, René J.V. <rjvbertin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday October 22 2015 22:05:59 Marko Käning wrote:
>> > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-44473?focusedCommentId=272971&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-272971)
>> > Because the proposal supports environment variables too, I guess this
>> > would also cover the OS X needs (env XDG_CONFIG_DIRS).
>> that actually slipped my attention back then! :-|
>> OK, perhaps that is a way to go then also for MacPorts?! @René?
> I understood from Jeremy's reply at the time that it wasn't exactly what we'd need. I'm not familiar with how qt.conf is to be used, but my 1st impression is that neither a per-app-bundle qt.conf nor a central, shared one would be the perfect solution. The per-application approach will be much more maintenance-heavy, and a central, shared file would mean that all applications depending on Qt5 use either the one or the other QSP "flavour".
> R.
> _______________________________________________
> Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
> Kde-frameworks-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

More information about the kde-mac mailing list