Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by Anonymous on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @01:13

http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/qt3-win32/ has instructions where you can download and how you can help to make it happen.

Related Links

·   Articles on KDE on Unix and other platforms
·   Also by Anonymous
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by ac on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @01:41

Thank you!

I dont want to sound like a troll,
but quoting http://kde-cygwin.sourceforge.net/:

"Currently Qt 1.45, 2.3.1, 3.0.4, 3.1.1 and KDE 1.45, 2.2.2 and 3.1.1 have been ported and are of beta quality."

That's not Qt3.2 (and all Beta?) and kde-cygwin certainly does seem to be a Qt lead project. What guarantee does one have this kde-cygwin project keeps up? I guess I also have to foregive 'unstable' Mac support.

So far I am not impressed by Qt's support for cross platform and I AM talking pure GPL code here. After all its Trolltech themselves who claim Qt being cross-platform. But developers need to be send somehow to a non-trolltech site, still not to find what they are looking for.

I would prefer using Qt, but for now its still wxWindows here, and I am not even mentioning any dual license.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by ac on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @01:43

typo: and kde-cygwin certainly does seem *NOT* seem to be a Qt lead project."

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by Datschge on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @02:02

No, Trolltrech's official Qt's as well as KDE's Qt-copy patches (Qt/X11 only) are the only "leading" sources. Feel free to get what you want by giving them the support they ask you to give. If you don't want to do so and instead limit yourself to your own egocentrical needs don't blame others for doing the same.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by ac on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @02:31

Look, Trolltech tells on their site being cross-platform, but what this really seems to mean is: let uss create "leading" sources and let others do the porting which might or might not work. Those doing the porting cannot earn money which we CAN make from their porting by requering money for non GPL code.

All this is not really Qt pursuing being cross-platform in my book. If you call all this "me limiting myself in my own egocentric needs" then so be it!

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by agsnu on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @03:28

What exactly are you on about? Trolltech developed and maintains all of their own ports, AFAICT.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by cm on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @06:44

I guess there's some confusion here:

AFAIK:
- There's the win version of Qt3 which is a native version completely
written by Trolltech, *not* available under the GPL.
and
- then there's the cygwin version which is a port of the GPLed X11
version of Qt. This port has nothing to do with Trolltech.

So Trolltech writes and maintains the versions they claim to.
But:
> and kde-cygwin certainly does seem *NOT* seem to be a Qt lead project."

It's certainly not a Trolltech project. No one claimed that.
If you want Trolltech's win version of Qt you'll have to buy it.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by ac on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @08:59

Yes it seems I was wrong on the part where I thought Trolltech could make money of other peoples porting work.

The last post does indicate Trolltech hardly directly supports or encoureges GPL software under windows using their Qt library, I just think that's a sorry state of affairs. A different approach on Trolltechs part could move many more developers to start using Qt for cross platform stuff.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by Datschge on Saturday 03/Jan/2004, @23:24

I'm sure Trolltech might consider again releasing a GPL'ed Qt/Win when a KDE release on OSX should considerably increase the number of commercial Qt/Mac licencees. If that doesn't happen then a GPL'ed Qt/Win is very unlikely in the future considering the very bad experience with the previous free version.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: how about native Cocoa KDE port?
by Ralf Habacker on Thursday 12/Feb/2004, @16:06

The beta state in fact comes mostly from problems of the underlaying cygwin emulation library and because of the different os and/or service pack, buggy ms update combinations and relating problems for which I'm not resonsible, but are affected.

The qt 2.x releases were 85000 times downloaded (see http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=27249) with about 40-50 problem reports (I remember not very exactly, but it were very less).
For the qt 3.x release I have measured about 32000 downloads until now with very low problem rate (I remember about 5-10), so this port could not be so bad.

Additional I'm using this qt release every day writing mails with kmail/cygwin without virus problems,browse the internet with konqueror/cygwin and had never problems with qt library, more with hanging processes after a windows update (So it really seems to me that this qt port could leave the beta status)

BTW:This is currently not true for the native qt port, but we hope that this will be also in the future.

Ralf

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"I just wanted to be certain that the code was unmaintainable." -- Charles Samuels
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.