Bug 340126 - install backends to qt_plugin_dir
Summary: install backends to qt_plugin_dir
Status: RESOLVED INTENTIONAL
Alias: None
Product: Phonon
Classification: Frameworks and Libraries
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 4.8.0
Platform: Other Linux
: VLO wishlist
Target Milestone: 4.8
Assignee: Harald Sitter
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-10-19 16:57 UTC by Antonio Rojas
Modified: 2016-10-15 15:53 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Antonio Rojas 2014-10-19 16:57:15 UTC
In the Qt5 build, the plugin install dir seems to be hardcoded to $libdir/qt5/plugins. Plugins should be installed to the defult Qt plugin path of the system instead (qtpaths --plugin-dir, in my system it's /usr/lib/qt/plugins)

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Harald Sitter 2014-10-20 06:54:53 UTC
option(PHONON_INSTALL_QT_EXTENSIONS_INTO_SYSTEM_QT "Install Qt designer plugins, QML plugins and mkspecs into the system Qt install directory or not" FALSE)
Comment 2 Antonio Rojas 2014-10-20 07:09:27 UTC
The backends don't seem to honor that variable. phonon_gstreamer.so is still installed to /usr/lib/qt5/plugins
Comment 3 Harald Sitter 2014-10-20 07:19:43 UTC
That could be.
What'd be the point of not forcing it in there though? It also didn't do that with the qt4 build (always went to kde4 IIRC).
Comment 4 Antonio Rojas 2014-10-20 07:21:42 UTC
Mostly consistency, as it doesn't seem to break functionality. In my system phonon-gstreamer is the only package installing stuff to /usr/lib/qt5
Comment 5 Harald Sitter 2014-10-20 07:30:52 UTC
If you feel this is worthwhile, patches are always welcome :) FWIW I would suggest that the qt4/qt5 subdir should be dropped entirely and instead $LIBPREFIX/$PHONOSONAME/backends/ should be used as plugin lookup happens completely opaquely inside libphonon there is absolutely no reason why it would put the plugins in a global qt plugin directory.

https://techbase.kde.org/Development/Review_Board

Otherwise this probably will eventually go away with a transition to extra-cmake-modules, or well, maybe, or not...
Not worth fixing explicitly IMO as it only increases "neatness" rather than making things better.
Comment 6 Andrés Rodríguez 2016-10-15 15:53:03 UTC
Requesting reopening. This inconsistency is quite an annoying edge case when we have to probe for Qt libs using pkg-config, where we have to guess which qt folder contains what we're looking for adding unnecessary complexity because of two packages that may or may not exist in the user's system.