> On Mon, Sep 10, 2001 at 11:12:22AM +0900, R. Lahaye wrote:
>
> > Should we then add some testing against the available qt libs ?
> > Does that need to go in config/qt.m4 or in configure.in ?
>
> we should prefer a library called qt2 to one called qt, but fall
> back to qt if it fails.
>
> The compile check needs to use Qt2-specific features somehow
John,
Are you, by any chance, familiar with the m4 language in config/qt.m4 ?
I am not.
qt.m4 vs. files in FreeBSD:
UIC: /usr/X11R6/bin/uic
[okay with present qt.m4]
MOC: /usr/X11R6/bin/moc2
[fails because m4 script searches only for "moc"]
LINK: -lqt2 (/usr/X11R6/lib/libqt2.so)
[fails because it's hardcoded as only -lqt]
So qt.m4 needs adjustments in setting MOC and LINK for FreeBSD.
At last, the following qt2 issues
LIBS: /usr/X11R6/lib
INCLUDES: /usr/X11R6/include/qt2
are solved by setting configure flags:
--with-qt2-includes=/usr/X11R6/include/qt2
--with-qt2-libraries=/usr/X11R6/lib
Cheers,
Rob.
