I don't mean purposefully relying on them, but only ever testing with versions with those effects. This is one case where neither party knowingly does any wrong, but the end result is a dysfunctional piece of software.If you're relying on undocumented/non-guaranteed functionality of a specific version of a library, you're probably doing something you shouldn't do anyway, but if you insist, then sure, feel free to statically link or include that specific version.
I actually do agree with you. I'm just pointing out it's not as clear cut as I interpreted you made it out to be.If Qt is using minor version numbers to introduce backwards compatibility breaking changes, then you better specify the dependency sufficiently precisely (i.e. not 4.*.* but 4.0.* or 4.8.* or whatever). It still seems like a better idea to install (potentially different versions of) libqt system-wide than to have to include it in the PND of each and every application that depends on it.
I'll just head back under the bridge now