[Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership
Hi, I would like to nominate Paul for approvership. He started beginning of 2018 making changes to docs and reviewing doc changes. Whenever I made changes to docs, he has spotted many of my mistakes, so I've had a very good experience working with him ;-). I trust him to approve changes he's comfortable with. If you're curious, here's a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z and a list of changes he's on as a reviewer: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership
Simon Hausmann (12 December 2018 11:58) proposed: > I would like to nominate Paul for approvership. +1 - sensible fellow, clearly knows what he's doing. Full disclosure: there's only a thin wall between his office and mine. Eddy. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership
+1 From: Development on behalf of Simon Hausmann Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 11:58:47 AM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership Hi, I would like to nominate Paul for approvership. He started beginning of 2018 making changes to docs and reviewing doc changes. Whenever I made changes to docs, he has spotted many of my mistakes, so I've had a very good experience working with him ;-). I trust him to approve changes he's comfortable with. If you're curious, here's a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z and a list of changes he's on as a reviewer: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership
+1 From: Development on behalf of Martin Smith Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 12:26:45 PM To: Simon Hausmann; development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership +1 From: Development on behalf of Simon Hausmann Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 11:58:47 AM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership Hi, I would like to nominate Paul for approvership. He started beginning of 2018 making changes to docs and reviewing doc changes. Whenever I made changes to docs, he has spotted many of my mistakes, so I've had a very good experience working with him ;-). I trust him to approve changes he's comfortable with. If you're curious, here's a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z and a list of changes he's on as a reviewer: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership
+1 Best regards, Timur. From: Development on behalf of Topi Reiniö Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 1:41:34 PM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership +1 From: Development on behalf of Martin Smith Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 12:26:45 PM To: Simon Hausmann; development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership +1 From: Development on behalf of Simon Hausmann Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 11:58:47 AM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] Nominating Paul Wicking for Approvership Hi, I would like to nominate Paul for approvership. He started beginning of 2018 making changes to docs and reviewing doc changes. Whenever I made changes to docs, he has spotted many of my mistakes, so I've had a very good experience working with him ;-). I trust him to approve changes he's comfortable with. If you're curious, here's a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z and a list of changes he's on as a reviewer: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Paul+Wicking%22,n,z Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] CMake && QtCreator cross-compilation for ARM fails
Denis Shienkov wrote: > Change Dir: > /tmp/QtCreator-iobfII/qtc-cmake-wCnOwxuI/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp Run > Build > > Command:«/mnt/data/Yocto-miatech/sdks/sysroots/cortexa9hf-neon-poky-linux-gnueabi/usr/bin/make» > «cmTC_afb4e/fast» /lib/ld-linux-armhf.so.3: No such file or directory You cannot execute make from the sysroot without a binfmt handler and a matching ld.so. See, e.g.: https://wiki.debian.org/QemuUserEmulation https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Embedded_Handbook/General/Compiling_with_qemu_user_chroot But you will probably want to just point CMake to a make from the build host instead. Have you already set: set(CMAKE_FIND_ROOT_PATH_MODE_PROGRAM NEVER) in your CMake toolchain file? With that setting, it should not look for executables in your sysroot, see: https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/manual/cmake-toolchains.7.html#cross-compiling-for-linux > PS: WTF? Why the Qt's management choosed the CMake's instead of QBS? Because CMake is a widespread tool written in C++/STL (so, unlike QBS, it does not depend on Qt, which would mean a circular dependency when building Qt), widely packaged for GNU/Linux distributions, and with binaries for Windows and macOS shipped by CMake upstream (Kitware) themselves. It has a live upstream at Kitware, so Qt does not have to maintain it. And it is already widely used in the Qt and KDE community. QBS, on the other hand, is a custom tool, in practice only used by Qt and a few Qt-using projects (I know the aim is to support also non-Qt projects, but this is not really used in the wild), which requires constant maintenance effort from the Qt project. > From my point of view, the CMake it is a crap... CMake is not a "crap", it is a powerful tool, almost as easy to use as QMake, but a lot more flexible and powerful. > I know, that I'm not a CMake expert, but Why I need to spent a lot time > to make the CMake working wich an unknown result, > instead of just using QBS? Cross-compilation with QBS works > immediatelly, but with CMake sucks! Once you have the cross toolchain configured properly, which is a one-time setup effort, CMake will just work, too. Kevin Kofler ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] CMake && QtCreator cross-compilation for ARM fails
On Wednesday, 12 December 2018 15:20:28 PST Kevin Kofler wrote: > > PS: WTF? Why the Qt's management choosed the CMake's instead of QBS? > > Because CMake is a widespread tool written in C++/STL (so, unlike QBS, it > does not depend on Qt, which would mean a circular dependency when building > Qt), widely packaged for GNU/Linux distributions, and with binaries for > Windows and macOS shipped by CMake upstream (Kitware) themselves. It has a > live upstream at Kitware, so Qt does not have to maintain it. And it is > already widely used in the Qt and KDE community. Also, and perhaps more importantly: it has a very big community of people who can help answer questions. Like this one. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
