Re: [Development] Missing ARM, MIPS, other mkspecs in qt5

2011-11-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 15.47.00, Rohan McGovern wrote: > Hello, > > In Qt5, we no longer appear to have any mkspecs for cross-compiling for > ARM or MIPS. They were tied up with qws, so they were removed when > qws was removed. > > Is it intentional that we still don't have any, or

[Development] Missing ARM, MIPS, other mkspecs in qt5

2011-11-29 Thread Rohan McGovern
Hello, In Qt5, we no longer appear to have any mkspecs for cross-compiling for ARM or MIPS. They were tied up with qws, so they were removed when qws was removed. Is it intentional that we still don't have any, or has it just fallen out that way and we're free to add some generic ARM, MIPS mkspe

Re: [Development] Unicode/i18n support

2011-11-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Tuesday, 29 de November de 2011 21.41.58, John Layt wrote: > I'm generally in favour, even if it means throwing away most of my work > from the last few months :-) In QLocale it will definitely save us a lot > of code and maintenance , give advanced features at no extra cost, and > solves the l

Re: [Development] Unicode/i18n support

2011-11-29 Thread John Layt
On 25 November 2011 08:30, wrote: > I have been thinking a bit on how to move forward with Unicode support in > Qt lately. The current state is in my opinion not sustainable. > > Unicode and i18n support consists of quite a few different tasks. Roughly > speaking, we currently have a handful of

Re: [Development] Unicode/i18n support

2011-11-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On Friday, 25 de November de 2011 08.30.56, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > My proposal would be to simplify this setup and start relying on ICU for > many of the tasks. We would still expose things through a Qt API though. > It would simplify the maintenance of our Unicode support, as we can rely >

Re: [Development] QtV8 and the unittests

2011-11-29 Thread Holger Hans Peter Freyther
On 11/22/2011 10:57 PM, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > On 11/22/2011 06:49 PM, Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: Hi again, the previous points are not answered but I have one more question. Why do we need to have the QML_GLOBAL_INDEX slot and carry it around? Why can't we just patch src/cont

Re: [Development] [cmake-developers] Generating imported library targets without the cmake executable

2011-11-29 Thread shane.kearns
MSVC 2008 or later on windows XP or later. According to http://wiki.qt-project.org/Public_Autotest_Infrastructure the CI system is enforcing MSVC2010 on windows 7 must compile qtbase, but not enforcing other windows builds. IIRC, MSVC2010 is required for c++11 features From: development-bounces