On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> > ah, if what you have now works, then that's fine :)
> > was something to try if it wasn't working yet :)
>
> So here are the kirigami patches that I now use. The last one I don't
thanks, I'll take a look at
the kirigami.pri file from the Subsurface-mobile.pro file? And I assume
> > that i then don't need much of what I spent all weekend trying to make
> > work?
>
> ah, if what you have now works, then that's fine :)
> was something to try if it wasn't working yet
> On Aug 16, 2016, at 6:48 AM, Marco Martin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
>> Just to make sure I understand this correctly... You are suggesting that I
>> shouldn't build Kirigami as a separate library, but that I should include
>> the kirigami.pri file from the Subsu
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> Just to make sure I understand this correctly... You are suggesting that I
> shouldn't build Kirigami as a separate library, but that I should include
> the kirigami.pri file from the Subsurface-mobile.pro file? And I assume
> that i then don't need
--
Sent from my phone
On August 16, 2016 5:59:06 AM PDT, Marco Martin wrote:
>On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
>> > > - use the .pri file when directly linking in kirigami into the
>(parent)
>> > > project (include directive in PROJECT.pro), then the
>Q_INIT_RESOURCE is
>> > >
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Tomaz Canabrava wrote:
> > > - use the .pri file when directly linking in kirigami into the (parent)
> > > project (include directive in PROJECT.pro), then the Q_INIT_RESOURCE is
> > > not necessary. using qmake this seems to be the easiest way and at
> > > least seems to
Subsue
Em 16 de ago de 2016 04:43, "Marco Martin" escreveu:
>
> On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Martin Gysel wrote:
> > Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> > > It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file.
> > > The second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Martin Gysel wrote:
> Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> > It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file.
> > The second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> > documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
>
> maybe
On Tuesday 16 August 2016, Dirk Hohndel wrote:
> It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file. The
> second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
because with the pro it was supposed to build the dynamic plug
Am 16.08.2016 um 01:55 schrieb Dirk Hohndel:
> It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file. The
> second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
> documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
maybe my understanding of the qt build system, tools and librari
It's pretty clear that no one ever tested the kirigami.pro qmake file. The
second patch I'm not 100% sure about, but it seems to match what the
documentation tells us SHOULD be done.
/D
>From 8e4307346614943a940f11d2ee6159886c54ee83 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dirk Hohndel
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 20
11 matches
Mail list logo
