[kde-solaris] [kde-discuss] KBE 1.0 - Build enviroment for KDE

[Shawn Walker]

On Dec 11, 2007 12:57 PM, Stefan Teleman <stefan.teleman at sun.com> wrote:
> Shawn Walker wrote:
>
> >> Who are the "*other* developers" who depend on a build of QT that
> >> depends on libCstd.so.1 ? There is no QT right now in Solaris, QT3 or
> >> QT4, therefore there cannot be any "other developer" who depends on
> >> any particular build configuration of QT.
> >>
> >> RedHerring #2: We can't do <X> because of a non-existent hypothetical
> >> situation <Y>.
> >
> > Bull. I would bet that most Qt developers that are running Solaris are
> > building and using the "standard C++ library"; not stdcxx.
>
> I think you mean the Sun libCstd.so.1. The Standard C++ Library is
> just that, a Standard. There are several different implementations
> thereof.

Whatever; stop nitpicking. You know what I'm talking about. Whatever
C++ library you get when you don't link against stdcxx.

> Facts. Do you have any documented facts to back up your assertions ?
> Noone is interested in "i would bet", "i guess", "i think", "i feel".
>   We want facts. Do you have any ? Do you know of any QT distribution
> which installs, right now, under /usr, and which would create a
> conflict ? Can you provide an URL to it ?

How about you do the same for what you are proposing?

You *know* that linking Qt against stdcxx can cause conflicts.

So how are you going to justify them?

> > As a result, they would be depending on a version of Qt not built with stdcxx.
>
> As a result of what ? Your guess, which is based on an assumption ?

No more guess than yours that what you are doing won't cause a problem.

> > Are you really going to force them to relocate their build of Qt to a
> > different place (possibly) just because you want to build yours
> > against stdcxx which is not an expectation?
>
> I don't know the hypothetical installation location of the
> hypothetical QT build where these hypothetical QT developers have
> installed their hypothetical QT libraries. Neither do you.

I don't know the hypothetical documentation you have to prove your
hypothetical belief that it won't cause problems if you link your
version of Qt against stdcxx for developers who don't.

> If anyone has built and installed *any* software under /usr, in
> Solaris, they have assumed the risk that Sun Microsystems, Inc. might,
> at some point in the future, decide to install the exact same thing
> under /usr, thereby overwriting said poor choice of installation location.
>
> *This one* is a known fact.

Yes, and it's a known fact that this whole discussion has been about
installation locations and using the defaults.

-- 
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/

"To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." -
Robert Orben