raman325 / ostinato

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/ostinato
GNU General Public License v3.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

need cross-compile support for headless drone #96

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I would like to include the drone server on a headless embedded server, which 
does not have X or Qt.

Could the qmake/make build please be modified to allow something, like:

qmake headless
make drone

And, not have any dependencies on X or Qt?  This would be very helpful for many 
embedded projects, which are often networking devices too. :)

Is this possible?

Thanks!

Trevor

Original issue reported on code.google.com by trevorbo...@gmail.com on 6 Feb 2013 at 6:30

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Removing dependency on X is already in the plan (Issue 34)

Once that is done, you should be able to compile the Qt Base libraries for your 
embedded system to run drone.

Original comment by pstav...@gmail.com on 7 Feb 2013 at 1:56

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Hi,

I don't mean to be difficult - I'm just hoping against hope here ...  Are the 
Qt Base libraries *really* needed for the drone?  If it is a windowless, 
non-graphical server, why are any Qt libraries required?  (My understanding of 
Qt is that it is the library backbone for KDE, but that is all I know about Qt. 
 Please pardon my naivety.)  I am just hoping that it would be possible to 
remove Qt all together as a dependency for the drone, which I think would 
greatly improve its portability especially for cross-compiled systems, I think.

Thanks!

Trevor

Original comment by trevorbo...@gmail.com on 7 Feb 2013 at 3:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
One reason for using the Qt Base libraries are for portability of basic 
datatypes and other infrastructural things such as linked-lists, queues etc. 
across platforms. The alternative is to use something like Boost or write what 
is needed from scratch (not likely to happen). 

Tell you what, let's get the X dependency removed first, then we can 
re-evaluate this.

Original comment by pstav...@gmail.com on 10 Feb 2013 at 5:01

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
np - thanks for the insight and your hard work.  :)

Original comment by trevorbo...@gmail.com on 10 Feb 2013 at 1:45