On Monday 02 July 2012 09:09:53 Ivan Cukic wrote:
Debian Stable (Squeeze) is also 4.5 by default.
Debian Stable (Squeeze) is 4.4.5 by default, with GCC 4.3.5 being
provided too.
Yes, that is the reason I excluded Debian from the distros to watch in this
case.
Debian stable will
Am 01.07.2012 23:08, schrieb Ivan Čukić:
So, I'd be content in using 4.5 for the time being simply because the
two features I find important in 4.6 can be /simulated/ in 4.5.
I think that sounds like a good compromise, so +1
For 4.11 we can then re-evaluate whether it makes sense/is possible
On Saturday 30 June 2012 17:02:27 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
On Thursday, 28. June 2012 14:38:37 viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 27/06/2012 23:41, Martin Gräßlin ha scritto:
On Wednesday 27 June 2012 23:28:30 Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would
-1 from me.
Latest Slackware release has 4.5, and I would very much prefer if this
stays
working.
I don't see the features mentioned worth dropping platforms.
Alex
Yes, but the slackware-current is coming with gcc-4.7
Am 30.06.2012 17:31, schrieb Heinz Wiesinger:
However, the point of dropping platforms in general remains, I
suppose.
From what I understood the compilers are available in FreeBSD and I
think there was no other system having problems with it.
Regards
Martin Gräßlin
Windows emerge tool currently uses gcc 4.6.4 for 64-bit and either gcc 4.7
or msvc 2010 for 32-bit, so for gcc builds there should be no problem, I'm
not sure about msvc.
--
Andrius.
2012/7/1 Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org
Am 30.06.2012 17:31, schrieb Heinz Wiesinger:
However, the point
-4.7
..which is not yet released, so I do not really care.
Please let's not require a compiler version which is not yet in already
released versions of the distributions, released for let's say at least one
month.
After our IMO medium smooth switch to git, let's not break building KDE
- Generalized constant expressions N2235
- Unrestricted unions N2544
- Range-based for N2930
From my point of view, nullptr and range-for are the important ones.
Please let's not require a compiler version which is not yet in already
released versions of the distributions, released for let's
On Sunday, July 01, 2012 11:08:43 PM Ivan Čukić wrote:
...
- 4.6 is desired for the features, but problematic since not all
current stable versions of distros sport this version (last to fall
into line - Slackware)
...
Debian Stable (Squeeze) is also 4.5 by default. The next version (Wheezy)
Alle lunedì 2 luglio 2012, Scott Kitterman ha scritto:
On Sunday, July 01, 2012 11:08:43 PM Ivan Čukić wrote:
...
- 4.6 is desired for the features, but problematic since not all
current stable versions of distros sport this version (last to fall
into line - Slackware)
...
Debian
On Thursday, 28. June 2012 14:38:37 viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 27/06/2012 23:41, Martin Gräßlin ha scritto:
On Wednesday 27 June 2012 23:28:30 Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would people say if we
started asking for more modern compilers. I've
On Thursday 28 June 2012 00:27:08 Ivan Cukic wrote:
Can you explain why you need a more modern version, I see a good analysis
of what the current situation regarding compiler availability but i fail
to see why we need a newer compiler.
For me, the main reasons for this request are:
-
On Thursday 28 June 2012 00:55:15 Ivan Cukic wrote:
Workspace applications (kwin, activity manager, and more) are not meant for
/strange/ platforms like windows/mac, so they should belong to the later
category.
What about freebsd? Personally I am not willing to support that platform
anymore if
how would nullptr be useful with a macro-based switch? I actually want to do
a sed s/NULL/nullptr/g on the complete code base. And I hope everyone can
understand that :-)
Well, nullptr is a compile time check, right (like explicit override)? So, you
compile your code with a compiler that
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 10.14.03, Ivan Cukic wrote:
Well, nullptr is a compile time check, right (like explicit override)? So,
you compile your code with a compiler that supports it, making your code
safe in that aspect, while someone could still compile the code with an
older
Il 27/06/2012 23:41, Martin Gräßlin ha scritto:
On Wednesday 27 June 2012 23:28:30 Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would people say if we
started asking for more modern compilers. I've stated there I'll start
the discussion on k-c-d once we branch out
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 14.38.37, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
actually for stability and feature related to c++11 gcc-4.7 is nearly
the minimum, but in my experience gcc-4.7 is still a bit rough so +1 for
gcc-4.6
That's nonsense. C++11 support in GCC 4.5 and 4.6 is just fine.
--
Am Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012, 10:20:42 schrieb Thiago Macieira:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 10.14.03, Ivan Cukic wrote:
Well, nullptr is a compile time check, right (like explicit override)? So,
you compile your code with a compiler that supports it, making your code
safe in that
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Rolf Eike Beer
k...@opensource.sf-tec.de wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012, 10:20:42 schrieb Thiago Macieira:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 10.14.03, Ivan Cukic wrote:
Well, nullptr is a compile time check, right (like explicit override)? So,
you
Martin Gräßlin mgraess...@kde.org writes:
What about freebsd? Personally I am not willing to support that platform
anymore if it would mean that we have to restrict ourself to an outdated gcc
version. Reasons why in general I would find it acceptable to drop support for
non-linux in KWin are
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 13.37.14, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
Thiago, on C++ 0 and (void*) 0 are the same thing? I know that on C
they aren't, and I didn't found the information easily on the web.
No, they are not.
In C++, 0 can be cast to any pointer, but so can 0L and false. However,
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 18.09.22, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2012, 10:20:42 schrieb Thiago Macieira:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 10.14.03, Ivan Cukic wrote:
Well, nullptr is a compile time check, right (like explicit override)?
So,
you compile
Il 28/06/2012 16:31, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 14.38.37, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
actually for stability and feature related to c++11 gcc-4.7 is nearly
the minimum, but in my experience gcc-4.7 is still a bit rough so +1 for
gcc-4.6
That's nonsense. C++11
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 18.53.03, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 28/06/2012 16:31, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 14.38.37, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
actually for stability and feature related to c++11 gcc-4.7 is nearly
the minimum, but in my
On Thursday, June 28, 2012 09:20:54 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 18.53.03, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 28/06/2012 16:31, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 14.38.37, viv...@gmail.com wrote:
actually for stability and feature
On quinta-feira, 28 de junho de 2012 15.34.31, Scott Kitterman wrote:
It's probably worth mentioning that there are issues in GCC 4.7 with mixing
C++98 and C++11 code on one system. Here's the best discussion of it I
could find:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53646
I don't
- Fedora 16 - 4.6
- Gentoo - 4.5 (stable)
- FreeBSD 10 - Clang 3.1 (*very* modern)
--
Cheerio,
Ivan
[1] http://tinyurl.com/kcd-compiler-version
[2] http://www.kdab.com/last-week-in-qt-development-week-17-2012/
The compiler requirement has been updated to GCC 4.6, which is
consistent
Hi all,
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would people say if we
started asking for more modern compilers. I've stated there I'll start
the discussion on k-c-d once we branch out 4.9, so I'm doing as
promised. The post was only about kactivities, but the same could be
applied to
On Wednesday 27 June 2012 23:28:30 Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would people say if we
started asking for more modern compilers. I've stated there I'll start
the discussion on k-c-d once we branch out 4.9, so I'm doing as
promised. The post was only
Ivan Čukić ivan.cu...@kde.org writes:
Now, my proposal here is to update the required versions for
Frameworks 4 to reflect those of KDE Frameworks 5 / Qt 5. Now, I've
found different information for this - skelly says [2] the requirement
is GCC 4.6 while some other places state it is GCC 4.5,
Mainly, the responses were positive (from both users and developers).
What is the current minimum requirement?
Can't find anything similar for the later versions of KDE SC, but for 4.4 it
is quite a list (even gcc 3.3 [1]):
http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.4_Requirements
Cheerio,
On Wednesday 27 June 2012, Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
...
As an additional argument for raising the bar, here are the GCC
versions in most modern distros (collected by other people, didn't
check):
- Debian - 4.7 (testing)
- openSuse 12.1 - 4.6
- Kubuntu - 4.6
- Fedora 16 - 4.6
- Gentoo -
El Dimecres, 27 de juny de 2012, a les 23:28:30, Ivan Čukić va escriure:
Hi all,
Hi
I've tested the waters some time ago [1] what would people say if we
started asking for more modern compilers.
Can you explain why you need a more modern version, I see a good analysis of
what the current
Am 27.06.2012, 23:52 Uhr, schrieb Alexander Neundorf neund...@kde.org:
On Wednesday 27 June 2012, Ivan Čukić wrote:
Hi all,
...
As an additional argument for raising the bar, here are the GCC
versions in most modern distros (collected by other people, didn't
check):
- Debian - 4.7 (testing)
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Raphael Kubo da Costa
rak...@freebsd.org wrote:
Ivan Čukić ivan.cu...@kde.org writes:
Now, my proposal here is to update the required versions for
Frameworks 4 to reflect those of KDE Frameworks 5 / Qt 5. Now, I've
found different information for this - skelly
On quarta-feira, 27 de junho de 2012 23.28.30, Ivan Čukić wrote:
Now, my proposal here is to update the required versions for
Frameworks 4 to reflect those of KDE Frameworks 5 / Qt 5. Now, I've
found different information for this - skelly says [2] the requirement
is GCC 4.6 while some other
Can you explain why you need a more modern version, I see a good analysis of
what the current situation regarding compiler availability but i fail to
see why we need a newer compiler.
For me, the main reasons for this request are:
- lambdas (gcc 4.5)
- variadic templates (4.3 / 4.4)
- auto
From Ben Cooksley:
Debian Squeeze has gcc 4.4.5, and this is the base of build.kde.org.
It would be appreciated if we did not have to run Debian Testing on
the build slaves.
Honestly, while having Jenkins around is quite neat, I don't see a helper tool
as a valid reason to make the
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Ivan Cukic ivan.cu...@kde.org wrote:
From Ben Cooksley:
Debian Squeeze has gcc 4.4.5, and this is the base of build.kde.org.
It would be appreciated if we did not have to run Debian Testing on
the build slaves.
Honestly, while having Jenkins around is quite
39 matches
Mail list logo
