Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:59:31PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: >> Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> writes: >> >> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 02:01:33PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote: >> >> Like below? And how could I then access qscintilla-for-octave from >> >> maths.scm if it isn't defined publicly? >> > >> > Yes, that looks right. But I would put qscintilla-for-octave in >> > maths.scm to avoid the issue you describe. >> >> So would you say that this is clean enough that I could push both of >> these changes in their respecitive files before modifying the Octave >> definition? > > I would wait to push the Qt 4 variant until you have made sure it works > with Octave.
I have Octave successfully running with a GUI on my machine using the Qt 4 version of the QScintilla patch, though I've yet to test with the qscintilla-for-octave package. > > Also, I didn't notice a difference between the arguments for each > package variant. If there is no difference, could the Qt 4 variant > inherit the arguments, too? There is a small difference in the two fix-Makefiles phases. They replace different folder paths (the Qt 5 version changes the qtbase path to the package output path, the Qt 4 version changes the qt-4 path to the package output path).
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
