[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: gentoo-dev
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Useflags: qt, qt3, qt4?
From: "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn () gentoo ! org>
Date: 2006-06-21 8:58:50
Message-ID: 20060621105850.6d7a12b6 () c1358217 ! kevquinn ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
On Wed, 21 Jun 2006 02:39:29 -0400 (EDT)
"Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-" <msterret@coat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2006, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
>
> > Am I making sense? This looks a lot like the gtk/gtk2 flags, but
> > inverted; according to use.desc, gtk builds gtk+-1 unless gtk2 is
> > set, whereas the above builds highest version compatible with the
> > package unless a lower version is specifically requested through
> > USE.
>
> That's not what use.desc says gtk does. You just illustrated how
> confusing the gtk/gtk2 use flag situation has been.
>
> The gtk use flag doesn't specify a version. It just says that the
> package should build against *a* version of gtk+. The gtk2 flag was
> a way to prefer the gtk2 interface over the gtk1 interface if a
> package supported both.
ok; so in gtk-land we have gtk2 to prefer the newer interface whereas
the proposal for qt/qt3 is to have a specific flag for the older
interface. I do prefer the qt/qt3 approach, even though it's
inconsistent with what happens on gtk. I don't suppose changing
gtk/gtk2 to gtk/gtk1 would be popular...
> Thankfully, we've mostly moved past the gtk/gtk2 use flag mess now.
> Let's try not to make it quite so hard for people with the qt toolkit.
I think we're all agreed there :) So it's worth thrashing out properly.
--
Kevin F. Quinn
["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic