Hi all,
Unfortunately there were again some issues with qt5.git integration: openSSL
-folder was missing in (one) CI machine and that's why integration failed :(
Why it was missing is totally unclear, same stage was executed in that same
machine couple of days ago without problems...
Folder is
Hi all,
Unfortunately there were again some issues with qt5.git integration: openSSL
-folder was missing in (one) CI machine and that's why integration failed :(
Why it was missing is totally unclear, same stage was executed in that same
machine couple of days ago without problems...
Folder is
I've just updated the Changelog for 5.2.0 with the output from the script that
I've just uploaded at https://codereview.qt-project.org/71641. The changelog
update is at https://codereview.qt-project.org/71642.
There were exactly 31 commits with [ChangeLog]. Please start using it more.
Here's th
On Sunday 17 November 2013 23:11:32 Svenn-Arne Dragly wrote:
> On Wed 06 Nov 2013 12:54:07 PM CET, Rutledge Shawn wrote:
> > On 28 Oct 2013, at 10:35 PM, Svenn-Arne Dragly wrote:
> >> Secondly, I was missing a stereo option for the default QML Viewport
> >> element, and decided to have a look at th
Hi all,
As most of you most probably know we have had problems to get changes into the
packages. That's why there is quite much changes pending integration to qt5.git
at the moment. We should now have fixes available for known integration issues
and we are really hoping we could get qt5.git in
On 18.11.13 11:49, "Milian Wolff" wrote:
>On Monday 18 November 2013 10:11:40 Knoll Lars wrote:
>> Yes, once the patch is in 5.x and it affects 4.8 as well, it¹s usually
>>ok
>> to back port.
>
>I ask b/c back then Eskil wrote:
>
>> Eskil Abrahamsen Blomfeldt Sep 5, 2012
>> Patch Set 4:
On Monday 18 November 2013 12:46:24 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Monday 18 November 2013 11:06:57 Milian Wolff wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I'd like to ask again whether I could backport some performance
> > improvements in QTextLayout/QTextEngine from Qt5 to Qt4.
> >
> > Most notably there is http
On Monday 18 November 2013 11:06:57 Milian Wolff wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'd like to ask again whether I could backport some performance improvements
> in QTextLayout/QTextEngine from Qt5 to Qt4.
>
> Most notably there is https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,34112 which
> effects us in Kate/KD
Ah, I didn't realize it was safe to ignore that assertion. Agreed; it
shouldn't block the release then. Thanks for clarifying!
Regards,
Sze-Howe
On 18 November 2013 17:27, Heikkinen Jani wrote:
> HI Sze-Howe,
>
> As you most probably notice I have seen this issue myself as well. In my
> opinio
On Monday 18 November 2013 10:11:40 Knoll Lars wrote:
> Yes, once the patch is in 5.x and it affects 4.8 as well, it¹s usually ok
> to back port.
I ask b/c back then Eskil wrote:
> Eskil Abrahamsen BlomfeldtSep 5, 2012
> Patch Set 4: Do not submit
> I don't think these P3 optimization
Hi,
is there a way to emit Javascript exceptions from a C++ QML plugin or more
general: what is the best way to indicate errors to QML from within a QML
plugin?
The reason I ask, is because I am implementing the W3C WebSocket API (see
http://www.w3.org/TR/websockets).
In several circumstances,
Yes, once the patch is in 5.x and it affects 4.8 as well, it¹s usually ok
to back port.
Cheers,
Lars
On 18.11.13 11:06, "Milian Wolff" wrote:
>Hey all,
>
>I'd like to ask again whether I could backport some performance
>improvements
>in QTextLayout/QTextEngine from Qt5 to Qt4.
>
>Most notably
Hey all,
I'd like to ask again whether I could backport some performance improvements
in QTextLayout/QTextEngine from Qt5 to Qt4.
Most notably there is https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,34112 which
effects us in Kate/KDE as outlined here:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=225228
Th
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Mark Gaiser wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Olivier Goffart wrote:
>>> On Sunday 17 November 2013 19:07:48 Mark Gaiser wrote:
>>>
4. GDB (or whatever you used) should hit the bearkpoint. Now in
On 17 Nov 2013, at 11:11 PM, Svenn-Arne Dragly wrote:
>
> I hope so too, but if I don't hear anything I'll just try pushing it to
> gerrit and see how it goes.
Sounds good. I could conceivably test it at home; just got a 3D TV and haven't
used it for anything more than movies yet.
___
HI Sze-Howe,
As you most probably notice I have seen this issue myself as well. In my
opinion it isn't blocking the release: this is p2 issue, it is only in debug
build and user can continue by just selecting ignore. I agree it would be nice
to get this fixed but still I wouldn't block the rele
Hi,
I've seen this issue before and there it turned out that the sysroot was simply
missing the .so files and only the .a versions of the libraries were available.
Sounds stupid, but maybe worth double checking :)
Simon
Fra: Stephen Kelly
Sendt: 16:57 mandag 18. november 2013
Til: development@
On segunda-feira, 18 de novembro de 2013 09:57:03, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> I guess (3) is the most-likely option. The only thing I can think of to
> cause something like this is a distro upgrade I did to the new ubuntu a
> few weeks ago. I don't know what to look for though.
>
> What can cause sta
On Friday, November 15, 2013 01:26:16 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On quinta-feira, 14 de novembro de 2013 23:41:12, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 14, 2013 08:49:04 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > First of all, you seem to be linking statically to glibc. Don't.
> >
> > You seem to start
On 16.11.13 00:26, "Alan Alpert" <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:17 PM, Kevin Krammer
>wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Quoting your latest post:
>>> > I can understand that you'd like to have the same script engine
>>>evaluate
>>> > both types of script, but since the decision was to
20 matches
Mail list logo
