App install size

[Henning]

Hi,

Is it time to reconcider how apps are installed?

Why not take the dotnet path? To install and run an app, the Qt Libraries should/must be installed at the default path. That would take care of all needed libraryfiles beeing accessible from all Q7B apps at one location. We would not need to install all needed libraryfiles exclusively for each app. This would dramatically reduce the install size. When/If distributing we can provide a link to download/install the Qt libraries.
My (windows) install is at: C:\Qt\4.8.0\bin\*.dll

Today if installing 5 Q7B apps, there will be 5 copies of all needed libraryfiles. One set for each app. The "new" way there would be only the executable and app specific resources to install.

/Henning

[Slowdown]

That's a problem a long time existing in windows.
Shared dll's are a pain in the a***
If your app is using a certain version of ddl's and MS decide to 'update' some ddl's it can be happen that your app
no longer will run.
It has happened that some developers used/created there own version of specific (shared) ddl's and placed them in /system or /system32
with the result that one or more app's won't work anymore.
I can only speak for Windows till Windows XP
just my 2 cents

[Henning]

Shared dll's are a pain in the a***

Thats not the same as many Q7B apps using the "protected" Qt .dll files.

If your app is using a certain version of ddl's and MS decide to 'update' some ddl's it can be happen that your app
no longer will run.

So far all my M$ updated .dll are backwards compatible, and it certainly will not mess with the Qt .dll's.

... ddl's and placed them in /system or /system32

If you put your own .dll's in the app folder it works, there is sometimes a need for a manifest though, never mess with the OS's .dll's...

/Henning

[Slowdown]

Sorry was thinking generally but you ment Q7B, in that case 'have nothing said'