Re: X11 at Qt-Trolltech
Re: X11 at Qt-Trolltech
- Subject: Re: X11 at Qt-Trolltech
- From: Paul Floyd <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:14:28 +0100
On 11 Feb 2008, at 09:01, Martin Costabel wrote:
Paul Floyd wrote:
On 11 Feb 2008, at 00:44, David File wrote:
X11 and Qt,
Does anyone have some positive or negative experiences to report?
I'm wondering if I should be focusing on the Mac interface
instead, but am attracted to the idea of easing into the learning
process and building on current gcc, non-gui experience.
You do realize that there is a Mac 'native' version of Qt?
I can only think of a few reasons for using the X11 version
- in order to pay one less platform licence
Last time I looked, both were free.
Qt has a dual licence. Commercial and opensource. The opensource
versions lack a few things that the commercial version has (such as
SQL drivers other than MySQL). In addition, you can only develop free
software with the opensource Qt. The commercial licence is per
platform, so Mac+X11 costs more than just X11.
- porting from an existing X11 app to Qt, and using the QX11
wrapper classes
- need direct access to some X11 functions not present otherwise in
Qt or Carbon/Cocoa.
There is another good reason, which is one of the main reasons
people are still using X11 on the Mac:
- works over network.
I've never really thought of running a non-command line Mac
applications on my Unix PCs.
That said, I think I tried once (by mistake) to build Qt X11 on
Mac, and it failed. It isn't a supported platform, at least, not
in the Assistant platform notes.
Fink has packages for the X11 versions of qt3 and qt4, and they
build and work very well, thank you.
In that case I'd suggest using Fink gcc with Fink Qt. Otherwise stick
to Xcode gcc (and build your own Qt from source).
A+
Paul
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden