Re: Staying on top of Qt security

[Ricardo Wurmus <rekado@elephly.net>]

Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:

> On Sat, Mar 05, 2016 at 10:16:05PM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> We could ask drobilla for a new suil release.  I don’t think we should
>> package the development version as it’s not clear if dependent
>> applications would work with the latest suil.
>
> Sounds good. Would you like to do it, since you are clearly the expert?

I just checked some packaging information for Suil.  Maybe we should
just split it into different packages:

    The purpose of Suil is to abstract plugin UI toolkits away from host
    code.  To achieve this, Suil performs its magic by dynamically
    loading modules for each toolkit.  The main Suil library does NOT
    depend on any toolkit libraries, and thus neither should your
    package.  Please package the individual modules
    (e.g. libsuil_gtk2_in_qt4.so) as separate packages, which themselves
    depend on the involved toolkits.  These packages should also be
    versioned as described above to support parallel installation.

    Please do not make the main Suil package depend on any toolkit
    package, this defeats the purpose of Suil and will severely irritate
    those who for whatever reason do not want a particular toolkit
    dependency.  The main Suil package may have a weak dependency
    (e.g. "recommends") on the individual wrapper modules, and it's fine
    if these are installed by default, but it must be possible to
    install Suil without installing them if the user explicitly wishes
    to do so.

    [http://svn.drobilla.net/lad/trunk/suil/PACKAGING]

How about we do just that?  Maybe we’ll find that the qt4 backend is not
needed by any other package at all.

~~ Ricardo