>> Sorry for the rant. > > I have the same conclusion. That’s why I decided to use the Qt 4.6 mingw > development environment. They are moving fast and my impression was that we > are behind them at some steps, but maybe I am wrong.
QT having his own special MinGW release doesn't seem like an extremely good direction. I've checked the QT Creator MinGW build, and it's a standard MinGW 4.4.0 release with a few extra packages, like gdb (plus local patch), plus some extra win headers and patch... and a slightly older binutil and w32api pkgs, by and large. Practically it's almost the same, but easier to install (although it also installs MSVC redist pkg without asking and copies its installer to drive root without removing it at the end of installation), so fortunately it's not _so_ bad I first thought based on latest QT moves. Still I hope they'll submit patches to std MinGW rather than maintaining a fork. I hope tdragon team will release a proper DWARF build, so it will be possible to have QT compatible MinGW in a usable way. Until then QT 4.6 users have no easy way, we've been there already 2-3-4 years ago... Brgds, Viktor _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB) Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
