On domingo, 18 de março de 2012 12.03.17, craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but we can't keep supporting very old systems. By the time of
> > the release, OpenSUSE 11.1 will be 18 months old or older.
>
> Wow. are you suggesting that we're only interested in ensuring Qt5 runs
> on sys
On 18/03/2012, at 12:03 PM, Robin Burchell wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:43 AM, wrote:
>> I asked about xcb on the LSB mailing list and early responses suggest that
>> although xcb has been mentioned there before, it doesn't sound like it's
>> progressed much beyond that. Dropping suppor
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:03 AM, wrote:
> Wow. are you suggesting that we're only interested in ensuring Qt5 runs
> on systems that 18 months old or newer? That's going to make a lot of
> enemies.
opensuse 11.1 was released in 2008. that's a lot more than 18 months.
___
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:43 AM, wrote:
> I asked about xcb on the LSB mailing list and early responses suggest that
> although xcb has been mentioned there before, it doesn't sound like it's
> progressed much beyond that. Dropping support for xlib and relying on xcb
> would thus make Qt5 a no
On 18/03/2012, at 11:53 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On domingo, 18 de março de 2012 11.43.02, craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
>> That's fine when you are only building an application to run on your
>> machine, but for people who want to distribute Qt5 apps, this would be an
>> undesirable solution.
On domingo, 18 de março de 2012 11.43.02, craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
> That's fine when you are only building an application to run on your
> machine, but for people who want to distribute Qt5 apps, this would be an
> undesirable solution. You'd end up having to ship the xcb libraries as well
> as
On 18/03/2012, at 9:58 AM, Pier Luigi wrote:
> 2012/3/17 Bradley Smith :
>>
>>> The workaround for systems that don't meet the minimum requirements is to
>>> upgrade. Running brand, new and bleeding edge Qt 5 on an old system is not
>>> a
>>> target for us. Simply upgrade -- at the very least th
Golf clap
I relish modularity, but construing a hard dependency as a soft dependency
is inviting a world of hurt for the CI underpant gnomes (/me makes a note
to buy Kent flowers next time he is in Oslo)
On Mar 16, 2012 3:14 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
> Again the qtdeclarative CI has been blocked an enti
2012/3/17 Bradley Smith :
>
>> The workaround for systems that don't meet the minimum requirements is to
>> upgrade. Running brand, new and bleeding edge Qt 5 on an old system is not
>> a
>> target for us. Simply upgrade -- at the very least the requirements.
>
> Is it possible to upgrade just XCB?
> The workaround for systems that don't meet the minimum requirements is to
> upgrade. Running brand, new and bleeding edge Qt 5 on an old system is not
> a
> target for us. Simply upgrade -- at the very least the requirements.
>
Is it possible to upgrade just XCB? Upgrading the OS from OpenSU
Add ons.
Girish
2012/3/16 :
> Right, sorry for the confusion.
>
>
> Should I list Qt OpenGL under Essentials or Add-ons?
>
>
> Quim
>
>
> On 3/16/12 7:01 PM Storm-Olsen Marius (Nokia-MP/Austin) wrote:
>
> Wohaa! I don't think i said to purge the QtOpenGL docs, those are still
> valid. It's only
11 matches
Mail list logo
