On 4 March 2013 19:59, Andrea Scarpino <andrea@archlinux.org> wrote:

...

Please maintainers fix your PKGBUILDs so they build on systems with both qt4 and qt5-base installed; when your PKGBUILD needs qt4 and: * use qmake, you can replace it with qmake4 * use cmake, you can add -DQT_QMAKE_EXECUTABLE=qmake4 to the cmake

On Thursday 28 February 2013 00:14:55 you wrote: options

Just a note here: I had to remove the qmake4 symlink and use qmake-qt4 instead as the former was inconsistent with others distro. When I did this change (1th March) qmake4 wasn't really used yet so I did not think to write this mail before. I'm sorry if this caused more confusion here.

I have wondered about this for a while. I think that is best convention to follow and we should apply that to all transitional packages from now on. That is, instead of: qt4-foo python2-foo or: foo4 foo2 or some other variant, we should have: foo-qt4 foo-python2 This applies to the executables only (and only when we're making the change, not upstream), and has nothing to do with the package name. It is intuitive because this way tab-completion or common sense shows you the possibilities in case you have upgraded. However, I am not sure how portable this convention is and whether other distros are likely to behave the same way. Still, 'foo4' is very misleading as the '4' is a version number of a dependency, and not of the program itself. -- GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1