[osg-users] Linux packaging: Qt 4 vs 5

Andre Normann andre.normann at gmail.com
Tue Jul 19 23:47:29 PDT 2016

Hi Robert,

but there is one problem with OpenThreads when moving osgQt out of the core
OSG. To get threading working with Qt5, I need the Qt version of
OpenThreads. When you do not whant to have any dependence to Qt in the core
OSG library, then we also need to drop the support of Qt inside OpenThreads.

Best regards,

2016-07-19 16:08 GMT+02:00 Robert Osfield <robert.osfield at gmail.com>:

> Hi Stuart,
> On 18 July 2016 at 18:24, Stuart Mentzer <osgforum at tevs.eu> wrote:
> > The Fedora OSG packager added this comment to the Bugzilla entry:
> >
> >
> >> Having experimented a bit with Qt4/Qt5 builts, I found this won't be
> easily achievable.
> >>
> >> - OSG-3.4.0's qt-libs/plugins/binaries use non-qt-versioned file
> names/SONAMEs. I.e. qt4 and qt5-compiled binaries will conflict at
> runtime/installation time.
> >>
> >> - Qt5-built OSG is slightly incompatible with Qt4-build versions of
> OSG-3.4.0.
> >> (Building against QT5 causes OSG to drop the osgdb_qfont.so plugin)
> >>
> >> - OSG-3.4.0 monolytical [monolithic?] build system treats QT4 and QT5
> as mutually exclusive alternatives.
> >>
> >> All in all, I don't see an easy way to implement parallel installation
> of qt4-/qt5-build variants.
> >
> >
> > If these issues can't be finessed, separating just osgQt into Qt 4 and 5
> packages won't suffice: we'll need separate OSG builds, installation paths,
> and library naming. But maybe someone more familiar with Linux builds can
> see a simpler approach. Having both Qt 4 and 5 builds on Linux seems to
> have value but if that's not practical it might be time with OSG 3.6.0 to
> encourage Linux packagers to switch to Qt 5.
> I don't think just switching to Qt5 is a solution.
> I've come to the conclusion that we need separate osgQt4 and osgQt5
> Libraries.
> I also feel that having either in the core OSG would not be
> appropriate, no other core OSG NodeKit/Libraries have external
> dependencies like Qt, it has never sat alongside the rest of the OSG
> as a comfortable companion.  For OSG-3.6 I now think we should not
> have any osgQt library included, as if we didn't when we'd encode in
> the lack of flexibility for which Qt version to target for yet another
> generation of OSG.
> What I think is appropriate would be to first move osgQt out into it's
> own separate project/repository, something we can host on our
> OpenSceneGraph github account.  The next step would be then to create
> a dedicated osgQt4 and osgQt5 library either from within the osgQt
> project or as separate projects.  I would suggest that we have OSG/Qt
> users step up and direct the future of osgQt/osgQt4/osgQt5.  I would
> suggest that this project work with a range of OSG version rather than
> just the up coming OSG-3.6.
> On the practicalities front we need to five write permission on the
> OpenSceneGraph/osgQt project to who ever wants to lead/contribute to
> it.   It might be that hosting it as part of OpenSceneGraph githib
> account would not serve this purpose well.   I welcome suggestions on
> this.
> Robert.
> _______________________________________________
> osg-users mailing list
> osg-users at lists.openscenegraph.org
> http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openscenegraph.org/pipermail/osg-users-openscenegraph.org/attachments/20160720/ecea7542/attachment-0003.htm>

More information about the osg-users mailing list