[SailfishDevel] SailfishOS as an OS/platform in Qt

Franck Routier (perso) alci at mecadu.org
Fri Dec 5 08:21:57 UTC 2014

There is probably an interesting paper here 
(but I did not take the time to dig into yet...)


Le 04/12/2014 17:38, Alejandro Exojo a écrit :
> Hi.
> I've asked this a couple of times on IRC, but I haven't found a fully
> satisfying answer. I want to see SailfishOS as any other OS/platform is
> featured in Qt: by having some qmake support to detect wheter I'm compiling
> for SailfishOS or not.
> Once that is done, having a Q_OS_SAILFISH preprocessor macro that can also
> choose different paths in C++ and adding support in QFileSelector is trivial.
> The big question is: do you want such thing in Qt? If yes, I would gladly do
> it myself, since I have some time available and I'm looking for ways to
> contribute to Qt, learn, etc.
> Rationale:
> Right now everyone is baking its own way, with varying degrees of success. ;-)
> I looked at it a year ago when I started writing my Sailfish application, and
> I was pointed to puzzle-master's sources, where a simple
> packagesExist(sailfishapp) did the trick... or so I thought. Since I wasn't
> testing the non-Sailfish branch much, I didn't realize Creator always returns
> true on this condition (by design: not allowed to fork a process when parsing
> .pro files). Seems a petty complaint (who cares about Creator that much? it
> works for qmake just fine), but with harbour requiring a "harbour-" prefix in
> the name of the executable, Creator might not even be able to start the
> application because it doesn't find it if you use a different value for
> Lately I've been finding time for the app again and I finally noticed the
> problem, so I asked on IRC again. I was pointed at other application, and the
> check used was even worse. :-)
> Then I searched a bit in the branch of the mer-qt/qtbase repo. I see you don't
> use any mkspec for SailfishOS or Jolla, right? That's where I thought you
> might have it, and where I think it could be. Blackberry sets there the
> Yes, yes. I know there is a solution: pass a parameter to the qmake
> invocation. Store the invocation flag on the RPM packaging for final
> deployment, and maybe a .pro.shared file for development. That's what Puzzle
> Master has now too. Still I think there is some value in having this sorted
> out in a more general way, specially given that you'll want people to also
> distinguish a build for the Jolla phone or the Jolla tablet.
> Cheers.

More information about the Devel mailing list