Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

> Is there any plans for an out-of-schedule update about this (if plan exists > at all =), as I have to deliver something end of next week, so if it’s not > going to happen next week I have to start making steps to rebuild things > myself. Even if 5.9.3 is be rebuilt and new binaries are

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

>>it's existential for Qt to get off its own container classes. >>I shall in the future extend that statement to anything that overlaps >>with std. Two points to keep in mind: 1) the std implementation varies with compiler vendors, each one with a different set of bugs, unit tests and sometimes

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On 1 December 2017 at 22:35, Thiago Macieira wrote: > In theory, it's possible to use GCC 6 against an old set of libstdc++ headers. > > I don't know if the GCC devs officially support this (Ville, can you chime > in?). There's no attempt by GCC maintainers to make a

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On 2017-12-01 20:57, Marc Mutz wrote: V8 fork, anyone? Or was it V4? ETOOMANYJSENGINES ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On Friday, 1 December 2017 11:57:33 PST Marc Mutz wrote: > > Why can't they write > > > > QStringView(s1).compare(s2) ? > > I think you owe me a bit more thought on an answer to a mail of mine > that that :P > A quick look at the qCompareString() overload set will answer this > question

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On Friday, 1 December 2017 10:59:48 PST Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote: > > (just look at how we have to build Linux binaries with GCC 4.8). > > Isn't it possible to use a newer GCC but to tell it to use GCC 4.8's ABI ? > eg to target GCC 4.8, by using -fabi-version=2 -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On 2017-12-01 19:26, Thiago Macieira wrote: On Friday, 1 December 2017 01:31:18 PST Marc Mutz wrote: > Once those operator<=> are there, what benefit is there in having the > API > public and documented? The spaceship operator solves the problem for qCompareStrings(). One could say we already

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

Is there any plans for an out-of-schedule update about this (if plan exists at all =), as I have to deliver something end of next week, so if it’s not going to happen next week I have to start making steps to rebuild things myself. Regards, Yuri From: Thiago

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

> (just look at how we have to build Linux binaries with GCC 4.8). Isn't it possible to use a newer GCC but to tell it to use GCC 4.8's ABI ? eg to target GCC 4.8, by using -fabi-version=2 -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0 Best, --- Jean-Michaël Celerier http://www.jcelerier.name On Fri, Dec 1,

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

You will not be able to use compiled qt installer on centos 6 anyway. It's our standard installation OS and we just compile Qt from source because glibc is incompatible On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:48 PM, probono wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 7:29 PM, Ville Voutilainen >

Re: [Development] New BiC gotcha: adding noexcept

On Friday, 1 December 2017 06:41:18 PST Marc Mutz wrote: > On 2017-12-01 15:21, Marc Mutz wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I just realised: Since C++17, noexcept is part of the mangled name. > > That means that adding noexcept to an exported function is BiC now! > > This is not correct, after all. The

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

On Friday, 1 December 2017 01:53:06 PST Yuri Alexandrov wrote: > Am I right then thinking that only way to make 5.9.3 works on RH6 is to > rebuild from sources as online installer is not working there due to glibc > issues? RHEL 6 is too old, even despite this issue. You need to build from

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

On Friday, 1 December 2017 00:02:54 PST Jani Heikkinen wrote: > I understand that but still I think we shouldn't do this. Qt 5.9.4 is coming > on January and I hope we can wait to fix this there. I don't think we can wait. This is not a regresion that will be fixed. This is almost a P0 for our

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On Friday, 1 December 2017 01:31:18 PST Marc Mutz wrote: > > Once those operator<=> are there, what benefit is there in having the > > API > > public and documented? > > The spaceship operator solves the problem for qCompareStrings(). One > could say we already have all relational operators for

[Development] Coin Network Problems

Lately, many users of CI have been suffering from build and test agents failing because of timeouts. As one of the causes, we have found out that there are unused network interfaces that are not removed when opennebula daemon disposed the VMs. As a result, this will cause MAC address conflicts

Re: [Development] New BiC gotcha: adding noexcept

On 2017-12-01 15:21, Marc Mutz wrote: Hi, I just realised: Since C++17, noexcept is part of the mangled name. That means that adding noexcept to an exported function is BiC now! This is not correct, after all. The name mangling of functions does not change, since you can't overload on

[Development] New BiC gotcha: adding noexcept

Hi, I just realised: Since C++17, noexcept is part of the mangled name. That means that adding noexcept to an exported function is BiC now! Please be aware of this when reviewing patches. Since non-template inline members of exported classes are exported, too, in MSVC Debug builds, the same

[Development] Fw: Qt 5.10 RC2 is out

Hi all, Qt 5.10 RC2 is released today. Delta to RC1 as an attachment. Unfortunately there is still at least two issues in RC2 which must be fixed before final Qt 5.10.0 release: QTBUG-64868 & QTBUG-64820. Luckily we have fixes for both available & we are planning to get RC3 out on Monday. And

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

> I understand that but still I think we shouldn't do this. Qt 5.9.4 is coming > on January and I hope we can wait to fix this there. We are that hurry atm > and even this is quite simple task it still takes quite much effort from us. > One basic idea with this new release model is just this; if

Re: [Development] Qt 5.10.0 RC out

The wiki now says: Release Candidate 2 Week 48 /2017 1.12.2017 Release Candidate 2 4.12.2017    Why two dates for rc2? Regards, Gunnar Roth ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

Ok.. as we just moved from 5.7 to 5.9.3 =) so, nice surprise. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Konstantin Tokarev Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 1:01:19 PM To: Yuri Alexandrov;

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

Ok.. as we just moved from 5.7 to 5.9.3 =) so, nice surprise. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Konstantin Tokarev Sent: Friday, December 1, 2017 1:01:19 PM To: Yuri Alexandrov;

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

01.12.2017, 12:54, "Yuri Alexandrov" : > Am I right then thinking that only way to make 5.9.3 works on RH6 is to > rebuild from sources as online installer is not working there due to glibc > issues? Same should be true for all previous releases starting from 5.8.0, as all

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

Am I right then thinking that only way to make 5.9.3 works on RH6 is to rebuild from sources as online installer is not working there due to glibc issues? Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Development

Re: [Development] QtCS 2017 QtCore sessions

On 2017-11-30 22:13, Thiago Macieira wrote: On Thursday, 30 November 2017 12:08:45 PST Marc Mutz wrote: Don't go off on a tangent here. I used concepts syntax to keep the example simple. I can post with std::enable_if, if you prefer :) Fair enough, I had not considered that. Anyway, the

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

On 1 December 2017 at 10:02, Jani Heikkinen wrote: >> > 2) recompile the 5.9.3 binaries and post them. No changes to the >> > source code, just rebuild. > > I understand that but still I think we shouldn't do this. Qt 5.9.4 is coming > on January and I hope we can wait to

Re: [Development] Urgent: Qt 5.9.3 binaries built with too NEW Linux distribution

> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io@qt- > project.org] On Behalf Of Konstantin Tokarev > Sent: torstai 30. marraskuuta 2017 20.49 > To: Thiago Macieira ; development@qt- > project.org > Subject: Re: