From: Tobias D. <tob...@gm...> - 2009-06-20 16:36:02
Attachments:
oprofile-port-GUI-to-Qt4.diff
qt4.m4
|
Hi, today I ported OProfile's GUI to Qt4 (which thanks to UIC3 and the Qt3Support module was not much work). I attached the result. Apply the patch, remove m4/qt.m4 and add m4/qt4.m4 (I was not able to include removal/addition of those files due to stupid CVS) and rebuild :) Any comments on this? Regards, Toby |
From: John L. <le...@mo...> - 2009-06-20 18:57:45
|
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 06:35:49PM +0200, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > today I ported OProfile's GUI to Qt4 (which thanks to UIC3 and the Qt3Support > module was not much work). I attached the result. Apply the patch, remove > m4/qt.m4 and add m4/qt4.m4 (I was not able to include removal/addition of > those files due to stupid CVS) and rebuild :) > > Any comments on this? Sure - what does it buy us? thanks, john |
From: Tobias D. <tob...@gm...> - 2009-06-20 23:16:33
|
Hi, Am Samstag, 20. Juni 2009 20:37:03 schrieb John Levon: > Sure - what does it buy us? Thought that was obvious... ok, the Qt4-port breaks of the dependency on a deprecated library (Qt3 is not supported by Qt Software/Nokia anymore and almost all Qt software already has been ported to Qt4). This way the GUI also integrates better into today's desktop environments. However it's up to you to include this patch or not but sooner or later the Qt4 port will become neccessary in either case. Regards, Toby |
From: John L. <le...@mo...> - 2009-06-21 02:57:42
|
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 01:15:27AM +0200, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > Am Samstag, 20. Juni 2009 20:37:03 schrieb John Levon: > > Sure - what does it buy us? > Thought that was obvious... ok, the Qt4-port breaks of the dependency on a > deprecated library (Qt3 is not supported by Qt Software/Nokia anymore and > almost all Qt software already has been ported to Qt4). This way the GUI also > integrates better into today's desktop environments. OK put another way: what distributions are we going to break by requiring Qt4? Maybe it's "none that count", which is fine, but I'd like the thought exercise done at least. regards john |
From: John L. <le...@mo...> - 2009-06-21 02:57:40
|
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:12:45PM -0400, Mark Asselstine wrote: > more beneficial to implement things with Model/View and also move to CMake and > away from autoconf/automake. We're not going to add another build system to oprofile, sorry. I'd be more inclined to just give up on the UI in favour of oprofileui to be honest. regards john |
From: Mark A. <mar...@wi...> - 2009-06-21 03:07:44
|
On Saturday 20 June 2009 20:24:04 John Levon wrote: > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:12:45PM -0400, Mark Asselstine wrote: > > more beneficial to implement things with Model/View and also move to > > CMake and away from autoconf/automake. > > We're not going to add another build system to oprofile, sorry. > np. I only threw that out there since most apps moved to it with their QT4 migration but I am with you on minimizing support for a suite which already has a functional build system that people are happy with. You won't get any argument from me and your response does not come as a surprise, I was expecting it :). As far as the suggestion to move to Model/View I would still stand behind that though. This is among the big changes from Qt3 to Qt4 and any app which is ported *should* be making use of it. Mark > I'd be more inclined to just give up on the UI in favour of oprofileui > to be honest. > > regards > john |
From: Andi K. <an...@fi...> - 2009-06-21 11:00:48
|
John Levon <le...@mo...> writes: Requiring qt4 will break a lot of older distros. At least the distros I'm familiar with typically also still have a "qt3-devel" of some sort. > On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 08:12:45PM -0400, Mark Asselstine wrote: > >> more beneficial to implement things with Model/View and also move to CMake and >> away from autoconf/automake. > > We're not going to add another build system to oprofile, sorry. Yes perhaps the gui should be just moved into a separate package, and then a qt3 and a qt4 version could be supplied. > I'd be more inclined to just give up on the UI in favour of oprofileui > to be honest. I tried oprofileui recently and wasn't too impressed. First it was a nightmare in terms of gnome dependencies, it seems it needs half of gnome installed to even build. Requiring that for standard oprofile would be a big step backwards. Then it crashed regularly on my 64bit system overrunning malloc buffers and glibc aborting. Then when you used it on a local system with a large existing profile directory it seemed to spend forever "downloading" files, which seemed pretty pointless because these files are already available locally. Then I found its habit to start oprofiled on its own somewhat annoying, it interacts quite badly with oprofiled being installed in a non standard location. I think a better standard GUI would be still a good idea; especially a GUI frontend to opreport; but oprofileui seems to need much more work to be even half usable. -Andi -- ak...@li... -- Speaking for myself only. |
From: Mark A. <mar...@wi...> - 2009-06-21 03:07:41
|
On Saturday 20 June 2009 19:15:27 Tobias Doerffel wrote: > Hi, > > Am Samstag, 20. Juni 2009 20:37:03 schrieb John Levon: > > Sure - what does it buy us? > > Thought that was obvious... ok, the Qt4-port breaks of the dependency on a > deprecated library (Qt3 is not supported by Qt Software/Nokia anymore and > almost all Qt software already has been ported to Qt4). Actually, as the patch stands, you have progressed forward somewhat but since you are making use of Q3* classes and not moving to using the new Model/View classes you are still using stuff that will become deprecated. It would be more beneficial to implement things with Model/View and also move to CMake and away from autoconf/automake. You can bounce patches off of me if you need, I would be willing to help look them over. Regards, Mark > This way the GUI > also integrates better into today's desktop environments. > > However it's up to you to include this patch or not but sooner or later the > Qt4 port will become neccessary in either case. > > Regards, > > Toby |
From: Tobias D. <tob...@gm...> - 2009-06-21 10:35:06
|
Hi, Am Sonntag, 21. Juni 2009 02:12:45 schrieb Mark Asselstine: > Actually, as the patch stands, you have progressed forward somewhat but > since you are making use of Q3* classes and not moving to using the new > Model/View classes you are still using stuff that will become deprecated. I fully agree with this. This patch is just meant as an initial work towards Qt4. Using Qt3Support module allowed a first Qt4 version with only minimal changes to existing codebase. > You can bounce patches off of me if you need, I would be willing to help > look them over. Ok thanks. I'll work on completely porting the GUI to Qt4 technologies. Regards, Toby |
From: Maynard J. <may...@us...> - 2009-06-22 15:50:08
|
Tobias Doerffel wrote: > Hi, > > today I ported OProfile's GUI to Qt4 (which thanks to UIC3 and the Qt3Support > module was not much work). I attached the result. Apply the patch, remove > m4/qt.m4 and add m4/qt4.m4 (I was not able to include removal/addition of > those files due to stupid CVS) and rebuild :) > > Any comments on this? Since we are trying to tie things up to put out a new release, I would rather wait on this. I hope qt3 support is not in imminent danger of being removed from the qt project... -Maynard > > Regards, > > Toby > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Are you an open source citizen? Join us for the Open Source Bridge conference! > Portland, OR, June 17-19. Two days of sessions, one day of unconference: $250. > Need another reason to go? 24-hour hacker lounge. Register today! > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;215844324;13503038;v?http://opensourcebridge.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > oprofile-list mailing list > opr...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oprofile-list |