Status of qt6pas

[HotShoe]

We are finishing up the beta testing of the desktop rpmgr package manager for Fedora 41+. It currently uses the qt5pas package. My question is : Is there an advantage to moving to qt6 now, before the release, or is qt5 more or less functionally the same on Wayland systems?

A sneak peek: www.mlsoft.org/rpmgr.html

--- Jem

[cdbc]

Hi
Kudos Jem, that looks damn good  =^
...and it looks a lot lot like my trusty ol' 'Synaptic' \o/
Regards Benny

[HotShoe]

Thanks Benny,

It's been sort of fun learning the strings in RPM and DNF5. It is very different than the APT group of programs like synaptic and aptitude. Fun to learn new stuff though.

--- Jem

[Leledumbo]

Is there an advantage to moving to qt6 now, before the release, or is qt5 more or less functionally the same on Wayland systems?

For LCL, not really. Maybe a little performance boost, but that's not significant for most apps (unless you utilize the non-UI parts). While it has Vulkan and Metal support, I believe the LCL backend doesn't use any of that. The only "problem" with qt5 is that it is EOL, while qt6 is still supported.

[dbannon]

I believe Qt6 is superior and more likely, in the undefined future, to cope with Wayland better than Qt5. But the differences now is not that great and more systems are likely to have the the LibQt5Pas installed.

But its so easy to produce either with just a recompile, why not make both Qt5 and Qt6 versions available ? Let the user (or the distro packager) make the decision ?

Looks like a great idea I must say, something badly lacking in the rpm world.

Davo

 

[cdbc]

Hi Jem
I just pitched your project to our PCLinuxOS forum, as a project to keep an eye on...
Regards Benny

[HotShoe]

But its so easy to produce either with just a recompile, why not make both Qt5 and Qt6 versions available ? Let the user (or the distro packager) make the decision ?

Looks like a great idea I must say, something badly lacking in the rpm world.

Thanks Dave, I think that is absolutely the way to go. It is already set up for x86-64, aarch64, ppc64, and riscv64 builds, so it just makes sense to include qt6.

--- Jem

[HotShoe]

Hi Jem
I just pitched your project to our PCLinuxOS forum, as a project to keep an eye on...
Regards Benny

I just received an email from Hunter. Thanks man.

--- Jem

[zeljko]

We are finishing up the beta testing of the desktop rpmgr package manager for Fedora 41+. It currently uses the qt5pas package. My question is : Is there an advantage to moving to qt6 now, before the release, or is qt5 more or less functionally the same on Wayland systems?

A sneak peek: www.mlsoft.org/rpmgr.html

--- Jem

If target distro have libqt5pas then leave it as it is, but if it's qt6 distro (like KDE Plasma 6.xx) then use libqt6pas. You can have both installed.