On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> > ah, if what you have now works, then that's fine :)
> > was something to try if it wasn't working yet :)
>
> So here are the kirigami patches that I now use. The last one I don't
thanks, I'll take a look at all of them
> think you want to take.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 03:48:49PM +0200, Marco Martin wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> > Just to make sure I understand this correctly... You are suggesting that I
> > shouldn't build Kirigami as a separate library, but that I should include
> > the kirigami.pri file from
> On Aug 16, 2016, at 6:48 AM, Marco Martin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>> Just to make sure I understand this correctly... You are suggesting that I
>> shouldn't build Kirigami as a separate library, but that I should include
>> the kirigami.pri file from the Subsu
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> Just to make sure I understand this correctly... You are suggesting that I
> shouldn't build Kirigami as a separate library, but that I should include
> the kirigami.pri file from the Subsurface-mobile.pro file? And I assume
> that i then don't need
--
Sent from my phone
On August 16, 2016 5:59:06 AM PDT, Marco Martin wrote:
>On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
>> > > - use the .pri file when directly linking in kirigami into the
>(parent)
>> > > project (include directive in PROJECT.pro), then the
>Q_INIT_RESOURCE is
>> > >
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
> > > - use the .pri file when directly linking in kirigami into the (parent)
> > > project (include directive in PROJECT.pro), then the Q_INIT_RESOURCE is
> > > not necessary. using qmake this seems to be the easiest way and at
> > > least seems to
Subsue
Em 16 de ago de 2016 04:43, "Marco Martin" escreveu:
>
> On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Martin Gysel wrote:
> > Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> > > It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file.
> > > The second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Martin Gysel wrote:
> Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> > It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file.
> > The second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> > documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
>
> maybe
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file. The
> second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
because with the pro it was supposed to build the dynamic plug
Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file. The
> second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
maybe my understanding of the qt build system, tools and librari
10 matches
Mail list logo
