On quarta-feira, 5 de junho de 2013 15.49.53, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > On 6/5/13 12:49 , Gustavsen Richard wrote: > >> From reading this thread, it seems that 10.6 support is pretty > >> important. But right now you need to build Qt from sources yourself > >> to get it. > > > > Is this good enough? It sounds like it would be better if the binary > > package continued with 10.6 support when so many users still has that > > version. Those that need C++11 and don't need to target 10.6 could > > still build Qt themselves (rather than the opposite)... > > I agree that the SDK should perhaps span to include 10.6 deployment support. > > Technically that's up to the people building the binary SDK packages, if > they configure with -no-c++11 or not. Qt's configure will by default > detect if it's supported, and adjusts the deployment target accordingly.
Since changing to libc++ could be a binary incompatible change[*], we should probably stick to libstdc++ for now and disable C++11 in Qt's build for OS X. Since we're right now building with GCC 4.2, no C++11 is in use in those builds anyway, so there's no loss. And there will probably be a gain, by upgrading the compiler. [*] it does not affect Qt's ABI, but it might affect other libraries that the user is compiling against. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
