In the issues: #25947 and #21901 , I and others did not follow the instructions despite intending to do so.
So I created this simple documentation update fordoc/build-osx.md
in a way that I expect it would have caught my attention.
95@@ -96,11 +96,13 @@ Skip if you don't intend to use the GUI.
96 brew install qt@5
97 ```
98
99-Ensure that the `qt@5` package is installed, not the `qt` package.
100-If 'qt' is installed, the build process will fail.
101-if installed, remove the `qt` package with the following command:
102+_Note:_ Ensure that _only_ `qt@5` is installed:
103+> If the `qt` package, i.e. 'Qt 6', is installed, configuring Bitcoin will find 'Qt 5' as expected, however the build process will still fail. [#25947](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25947)
I wouldn’t move this into quotes, no need for that. I also wouldn’t link to a specific issue here, and some cleanup suggestions.
0If you've previously grabbed the `qt` package, which installs Qt 6, you will not be able to compile.
100-If 'qt' is installed, the build process will fail.
101-if installed, remove the `qt` package with the following command:
102+_Note:_ Ensure that _only_ `qt@5` is installed:
103+> If the `qt` package, i.e. 'Qt 6', is installed, configuring Bitcoin will find 'Qt 5' as expected, however the build process will still fail. [#25947](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/25947)
104+
105+You may check for and uninstall packages with the following commands:
0You may check for and uninstall the `qt` package with the following commands:
Thank you for your review, I have partly adopted @jarolrod suggestions:
qt
installed; maybe they install it after and find their builds stop working! 95@@ -96,11 +96,13 @@ Skip if you don't intend to use the GUI.
96 brew install qt@5
97 ```
98
99-Ensure that the `qt@5` package is installed, not the `qt` package.
100-If 'qt' is installed, the build process will fail.
101-if installed, remove the `qt` package with the following command:
102+_Note:_ Ensure that _only_ `qt@5` is installed:
nit: This seems to be the only place where “Note” is italicized in the doc; it might be worth reverting to match the other notes. Italicizing also seems redundant here for emphasis, as it’s already a note.
0Note: Ensure that _only_ `qt@5` is installed:
crACK 0d600b999934a55c765cb2dcfd3ca64370dbcc97
Note: documentation/comments related commits are prefixed with doc:
(in lowercase), not Docs:
. So the commit message should be updated to doc: added note about brew and Qt 6 on macOS
or something similar.
95@@ -96,11 +96,13 @@ Skip if you don't intend to use the GUI.
96 brew install qt@5
97 ```
98
99-Ensure that the `qt@5` package is installed, not the `qt` package.
100-If 'qt' is installed, the build process will fail.
101-if installed, remove the `qt` package with the following command:
102+Note: Ensure that _only_ `qt@5` is installed:
103+> If the `qt` package, which provides Qt 6, is installed alongside `qt@5`, configuring will find Qt 5, but compiling will fail because some headers are incorrectly imported from Qt 6 locations.
Please unquote this
0If the `qt` package, which provides Qt 6, is installed alongside `qt@5`, configuring will find Qt 5, but compiling will fail because some headers are incorrectly imported from Qt 6 locations.
It’s sufficient to say that you can’t build if qt6 is installed, we don’t need to go into any technical detail. The only information needed is that qt@5
is the proper package and not qt6
. I’d still prefer something like this:
0If you've previously grabbed the `qt` package, which installs Qt 6, you will not be able to compile.
@jarolrod I have removed the quote formatting as suggested.
Can you please explain why there is no need to go into rationale that you cannot have both Qt 5 and Qt 6 installed simultaneously? After-all Qt 6 is becoming quite common now, and it quite reasonable that some developers will think: “Hey, why not? I need Qt 6 for this other project I’m working on.”.
ACK 7d67976d6d4e454f958d923189095a0484383712,
I also dealt with this problem once. This version of the docs would probably save me a round-trip to my favourite search-engine.
~0
Having both qt5 and qt6 installed, on an M1 macOS system doesn’t cause any issues, so I don’t think the problem has been properly/fully identified, and this addition would be incorrect for modern / macOS systems going forward.
Seems like we should just fix the bug. Unrelated packages shouldn’t cause problems.
Having both qt5 and qt6 installed, on an M1 macOS system doesn’t cause any issues, so I don’t think the problem has been properly/fully identified, and this addition would be incorrect for modern / macOS systems going forward.
Also #25947 (comment)
Agree with @luke-jr and @fanquake – let’s fully identify the problem first.