On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 March 2015 at 08:43, Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:52 AM, Rex Dieter rdieter@math.unl.edu wrote:
Dave Johansen wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:00:35 -0700 Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
Is that really true? The Qt 5 package in EPEL 6 has been updated several times and I don't recall ever seeing an email/announcement/etc.
Were the upgrades incompatible? You have to manually intervene?
Honestly, on the machines I'm using, I installed 5.2 and haven't
updated
since 5.3 was released because I didn't want to rebuild and re-test
all of
my stuff, but my understanding of the following is that the upgrades
are
not completely compatible: http://upstream.rosalinux.ru/versions/qt.html
Fwiw, Qt upstream takes both api and abi stability pretty seriously (official public interfaces). If you experience any concrete incompatibilities after upgrading, it's arguably a bug worth fixing.
Yes, but doesn't the change in the name of the .so require a rebuild?
So we can't speak in circles for a bit longer... what .so are you seeing this happen with. Yes a changed so will break a build so if it is happening then it needs to be looked and dealt with. A library may update itself but not bump the .so
Sorry, I let this topic go for a while. It appears that the change in the name of the .so didn't not require a rebuild for Qt Creator to continue working, so I guess it's not a problem.
On another note, a bugzilla was just opened to request that Qt Creator be updated inline with Qt 5 ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1282668 ). I'm going to assume that since it appears that everyone is ok with Qt 5 being updated in EPEL that it's ok for Qt Creator to be updated as well.
Any objections?