You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have an app built with Qt 6.4.2 which uses the new FileDialog from QtQuick Dialogs (not the old Qt.labs implementation). I initially used linuxdeployqt which managed to create the bundle and it works. I tried then to migrate to linuxdeploy with the qt plugin, but I get a seg fault when I try to use the file dialog because it tries to use the Qt.labs implementation which doesn't exist anymore. After some investigation I've seen that platformtheme libqgtk3 is not bundled (which was bundled by linuxdeployqt). After some searching in the code I've found this undocumented envvar: DEPLOY_PLATFORM_THEMES which managed to fix the problem. So for start I think this variable should be documented (even if it's experimental) and then I think some investigation is needed to find why it tries to search for the old implementation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Deploying those platform themes has caused a lot more trouble than they solved (they were mainly shipped for theming). I'm surprised to read that their lack has caused issues.
Please provide:
your distribution and Qt version (and where you got them from)
I have an app built with Qt 6.4.2 which uses the new FileDialog from QtQuick Dialogs (not the old Qt.labs implementation). I initially used linuxdeployqt which managed to create the bundle and it works. I tried then to migrate to linuxdeploy with the qt plugin, but I get a seg fault when I try to use the file dialog because it tries to use the Qt.labs implementation which doesn't exist anymore. After some investigation I've seen that platformtheme libqgtk3 is not bundled (which was bundled by linuxdeployqt). After some searching in the code I've found this undocumented envvar: DEPLOY_PLATFORM_THEMES which managed to fix the problem. So for start I think this variable should be documented (even if it's experimental) and then I think some investigation is needed to find why it tries to search for the old implementation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: