Build instructions: add more qt packages for Debian and Ubuntu #171
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
I needed to install these packages for the build to work. Without them, cmake failed looking for e.g. `Qt5LinguistToolsConfig.cmake`. This has only been tested on my system, which is running Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS. Partly addresses blueprint-freespeech#142, though it looks like the reporter intends/intended to do a more thorough analysis of the set of deps needed, so not sure it'd make sense to close it.
sporksmith
changed the title
morganava
approved these changes
Jul 22, 2023
|
reworded and committed as fcc67e6 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I needed to install these packages for the build to work. Without them, cmake failed looking for e.g.
Qt5LinguistToolsConfig.cmake.This has only been tested on my system, which is running Ubuntu 22.04.2 LTS.
Partly addresses
#142, though it looks like the assignee intends/intended to do a more thorough analysis of the set of deps needed, so not sure it'd make sense to close it.