9 Jan
2005
9 Jan
'05
4:53 p.m.
On Sun, 2005-01-09 at 07:58, Jan Depner wrote:
On Sun, 2005-01-09 at 00:06, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano
wrote:
Interesting. The original qt included in fc1 is qt 3.1.2-14. All qt apps
included in fc1 are dynamically linked (and were compiled) against this
version. The multithreaded dynamic libraries are (in this version):
libqt-mt.so.3.1.2
(3.1.1 in rh9)
For qt version 3.3.3 the version is:
libqt-mt.so.3.3.3
I originally tried to just upgrade the qt packages instead of creating a
new, different package. When I tried installing qt 3.3.3 as an rpm
upgrade, rpm itself complained about broken dependencies (ie: the new qt
would not work with older applications according to rpm - I don't
remember what were the missing dependencies).
I've done a little bit of research and I think the problem was not in
the qt library itself but in some additional libraries that were part of
the package (I'm not a qt expert so I don't know what they are).
In qt 3.1.x some apps depend not only on qt-*.so but also on
libqtassistantclient.so, which is not present in my qt 3.3 builds. I
can't be completely sure without rebuilding everything but most probably
that was the dependency that was not allowing a clean upgrade from qt
3.1 to qt 3.3 (current apps I have in rh9 that depend on that include
qt-designer - of course - but also PyQt, kaconnect, qjackconnect,
qarecord, qamix and ams). Hmm, all apps done by the same author, maybe
it is a build problem and that library is not really necessary? Or maybe
just a packaging problem?
On rh9 there is also a direct dependency by redhat-artwork on
/usr/lib/qt-3.1, that's probably because the bluecurve theme is not
included in the qt package but rather in the redhat-artwork package. I
included the bluecurve stuff in qt33 explicitly.
Most probably you don't have apps that depend on libqassistantclient (or
you have not tried to run them) and that is why you don't have any
problems.
-- Fernando
On Sat, 2005-01-08 at 20:46, Jan Depner wrote:
When did this happen? Can you give me some specifics on what is no
longer backward compatible? We've been paying $4000 a seat for licenses
and they have yet to break backward compatibility. Whenever we get a
new release they tell us to replace the old one. If they're going to
break things we're going to stop giving them money ;-) So far none of
my Qt apps have broken. Apparently the qt 3.3.3 rpms from CCRMA don't
replace qt.sh and qt.csh
in /etc/profile.d. I hand edited the scripts and replaced the default
3.1 with 3.3.3. I also had to remove qt3.1 from /etc/ld.so.conf and run
ldconfig.
Well, you can do that, but that will mess up all qt applications that
were not linked against qt3.3 (that is, all qt apps that were originally
compiled for qt3.1). Probably not what you want. Both libraries are
_not_ compatible and that is why qt33 does not replace qt3.1, it is
designed to be installed together with it.