On 05/14/2012 04:14 PM, Michael Lampe wrote: > <m.roth at 5-cent.us> wrote: > >>>> erm... that is going to mean that everytime there is an update for >>>> either QT or anything that it links into or anything that is in a lib >>>> associated down that chain - the entire stack needs to be rebuilt. Are >>>> you sure this is a good idea ? >>> I'm not sure, but the guy who is maintaining it seems to think so. I >>> advised him to build for CentOS 6, not 5, but 5 is much more widely >>> distributed and there are other reasons for staying with CentOS 5, >>> such as AutoDesk support. >> I hate having to worry about multiple libraries. And in updates of the >> std. packages, it can break your specialized one. I would have to >> recommend to your krista list to build against the library we have now. > Nothing in el5 depends on the qt4-4.2.x that ships with el5. It's an > old, rotten, and completely pointless package. Nothing of any interest > could be build with it for years now, probably never ever was it of any > use to anyone. > > I replaced it with a rebuild of qt4-4.6.2-20 from el6. This gives me a > common and useable base for both el5 and el6. > > That could be a sensible approach for a krita.el5 package, too. > I would certainly build and put that package into centosplus for el5 .. it would give us the ability build several el6 packages for el5 too ... if Kitra will work with that, then this might be able to move forward.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
