Qt Versions

[Brian Densmore]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JD Runyan
> 
> 
> Last time I checked make and rpm only do what I tell them to do as the
> developer or package maintainer.  Make can deal with symlinks 
> just fine,
> but I would hope the authors would not use it in that manner.  If you
Hope sprouts eternal!

> are compiling multiple versions of a library, you don't want the
> installer to go and symlink itself to old names all by itself. That
Ah, but that assumes you are using a RPM that "knows" you are or might
be using
multiple versions of a library. Lot's of RPMs "assume they are the only
version of a library and install the symlinks, overwriting existing
ones.

> could defeat your goal.  It is assumed that if you are building from
> source, that you know something about how to manage the 
> details of your
> system.
There's that nasty word again. "Assume" is probably the most dangerous
word
in history.

The problem with assumptions is they are so frequently wrong or
incomplete.

No, real [useful] installers need to verify what is in existence first,
then if in any doubt prompt the external knowledge base (aka person
installing said software) before doing anything destructive. So far I
haven't seen any one build such a beast. The Wise installer for M$ was
the closest I have yet seen, when properly configured.

Portage as real potential, too.
It just fails if it finds unexpected configurations [this is a good
thing actually].
 
Brian