Dear All,
thanks for the awesome mingw64, and for the equally awesome msys2.
Installation has been almost trivial, very nice work!
For the learning experience, I'm trying to compile Qt 5.5.1 for x86_64,
but I fail. It goes quite a while, but then it fails with:
g++ -c -include .pch/release/qt_pc
Hi Mario,
A thing as large as Qt is quite daunting to get to work, often because each
little thing you try requires a full rebuild to make sure the change was
actually propagated through all the layers of the build system.
I would suggest starting from the PKGBUILD for the binary package, which
Hi Ruben,
thanks for this very very good pointer!! I did not dare look behind
the scenes of the MinnGW packages, but it turns out that was my
mistake, they are indeed readable, and helpful! :-)
One more question, if I may: in the PKGBUILD you pointed out, there
seems to be a "wild" :-) mix of re
Hi Mario,
I'd say, prefer the mingw variant, but this is a delicate recommendation. I
haven't tried to build Qt5 myself since the script exists, so I'm not able
to give you any info.
I do know that Qt configure generates MSYS makefiles so you'll need MSYS
make, not mingw32-make to actually build
I am having a problem running an application which requires an external
DLL. The strange thing is that it occurs only when build for i686 and
not x86_64
I am trying to build the Emacs pretests using mingw-w64 and msys2. On
windows, Emacs uses libXpm-noX4.dll. So, to enable a "standalone"
install
phillip.l...@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord)
writes:
> I am having a problem running an application which requires an external
> DLL. The strange thing is that it occurs only when build for i686 and
> not x86_64
>
> I am trying to build the Emacs pretests using mingw-w64 and msys2. On
> windows, Emac
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Mario Emmenlauer
wrote:
>
> Hi Ruben,
>
> thanks for this very very good pointer!! I did not dare look behind
> the scenes of the MinnGW packages, but it turns out that was my
> mistake, they are indeed readable, and helpful! :-)
>
> One more question, if I may: i