Re: GUI no longer building by default

[Daniel J Sebald]

On 03/16/2013 03:23 AM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 03/16/2013 04:02 AM, Torsten wrote:
> > On 16.03.2013 06:38, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> > > On 03/16/2013 12:30 AM, Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> > >
> > > > similar to the following existing loop inside the configure script
> > > >
> > > > for ac_prog in moc-qt5 moc-qt4 moc
> > >
> > > BTW, should the "moc" come first? I.e.,
> > >
> > > for ac_prog in moc moc-qt5 moc-qt4
> > >
> > > What that would allow is for the system to define a symbolic link "moc"
> > > to either "moc-qt5" or "moc-qt4". Or is that a bad thing to do?
> >
> > Nice idea, but the order used so far makes sure the newest qt-version is
> > found. If we want to allow symbolic links to tools of the desired
> > qt-version I would suggest to introduce a name that is not used by qt
> > itself, i.e.
> >
> > for ac_prog in octave-moc moc-qt5 moc-qt4 moc
> >
> > Then, octave-moc is the name of the link to the qt-version to use.
>
> Instead of doing that, I'd recommend adding a --with-moc=... configure
> option as that is much more in the sprit of autoconf than encouraging
> people to create symbolic links in the filesystem.

That's fine with me, but it seems to be a whole suite of tools with the 
-qt5 and -qt4 qualifiers.  It could be there is something significantly 
different between qt4 and qt5, but typically systems (ultimately the 
utility programmers, i.e., authors of Qt) don't make a version number as 
part of executable files.

Torsten's recent fix brings the GUI back into the "configure".  To look 
first for version 5 and then version 4 seems the best one can do if in 
fact the system assigns distinct names for the different utility versions.

Dan