Important: Please read the Qt Code of Conduct -

Static linked pre-compiled Qt binaries?

  • For my purpose, I find it appropriate to distribute my Qt applications in a single executable. However, it's a pain to setup Qt for static linking because I have to recompile Qt every time there's a new version. Worse, if it's a new workstation, I have to go hunting for the required libs as well. I'm getting a distinct feeling that static-linking is highly discouraged in Qt!

    Don't get me wrong, Qt is an awesome toolkit and I'm fiercely loyal to it. But is there somewhere we can go for precompiled static Qt SDK? I'm about to bring more developers into my project and this will greatly reduce the initial overhead of getting my devs up and running.


  • Such discouraging is because of LGPL license, which is used by most (I think near 70%, but I'm not related to Nokia Marketing so I can be wrong in both directions) and which is not clear about static-linking.

  • Hmm I see. So, licensing is (one of) the main cause why static-linking is a pain for Qt. Now that Nokia's acquired Qt, has any of this changed though?

  • Can't you use dynamic linking and later on when you create the distribution switch to static linking?

    By doing that you should save time when switching between version, computer environments etc. You only need static linking once, when you create a distribution of your software and first then you decide which Qt version you need to compile for static usage.

  • Actually, that is what I'm doing right now. However, we make a release (almost) every month, and we always add new features that comes with the newest Qt, I'm afraid.

  • Are you compiling against daily snapshots? Dare devil! :)

  • God no! Just imagine all the overhead in the testing team.

    And even if I am I'm not so unreasonable as to request static-linked SDKs daily. :)

    Betas are the most we've ever ventured, and we're usually handsomely rewarded.

  • Moderators

    People wanting to statically link against Qt usually want to strip out classes and modules they do not need, etc. So most of them build Qt themselves anyway.

    Static linking to Qt further may further limit the licensing options of your code. Please study the licensing options of Qt to avoid surprises here.

Log in to reply