On Thu, 2014-02-06 at 00:41 +0100, Bruno Coudoin wrote:
Should I report a bug for these?
Another test on Android (Nexus 5 / 4.4.2) with a different set of
issues:
- The Audio are auto played by defaults, even if we force autoPlay to
false
- The ogg vorbis sound plays fine
- It is
In addition, it’s still required for WinCE. I don’t think we can remove 2008
just yet.
Cheers,
Lars
From: Chris Colbert sccolb...@gmail.commailto:sccolb...@gmail.com
Date: Thursday 6 February 2014 02:28
To: Thiago Macieira
thiago.macie...@intel.commailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com
Cc:
On Wednesday 05 February 2014 17:45:35 Turunen Tuukka wrote:
Hi,
Regarding Qt 5.2.2 - let's see how well 5.2.1 is received. We have now 1,5
months shorter cycle than the usual 6 months for Qt 5.3. I agree that it
was a long wait between 5.1.1 and 5.2.0.
FWIW with my Canonical hat we would
No bad idea, 2008 is the last version supporting anything older than the new
WEC2013 which we don't support yet, so its not likely to drop in the comming
years without dropping CE support too.
--
Björn Breitmeyer | bjoern.breitme...@kdab.com | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbHCo KG, a
CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
-mandeep
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Mandeep Sandhu
mandeepsandhu@gmail.comwrote:
Something similar happened to me too on the dev branch. Tried merging a
change.
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 14:28:52, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
CI continues to fail during build AND tests at seemingly random places. Any
idea whats going on or when it'll be fixed?
It's normal operating procedure. Some tests are flaky and are known to cause
issues every now and then.
In your
Hi Tuukka and all,
just like Albert said, it's not so much about the time until the next release.
It's more about delivering even more stable Qt releases with less changes that
are more reliable.
While I generally think that we are doing quite a good job in improving the
quality of Qt with
In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened
100%
of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen
when
your change wasn't present.
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10)
Hi,
In your case, the QDnsLookup failure is caused by your code. It happened 100%
of the time that the QDnsLookup test was executed and it did not happen when
your change wasn't present.
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on my
local setup (Ubuntu 13.10)
Hi
We've discovered (just lately) that in some cases incoming TCP packages are
bundled together. Somewhere along the line in our network code the first TCP
packet is drawn from buffers, but the remainders are left there. It's a random
thing, which we can reproduce in our test rig where we
Hi,
I have nothing against patch releases, on the contrary ;)
If there is good content to go out as Qt 5.2.2 / Creator 3.0.2 for example
in beginning of March - and we believe it is possible to create such a
release without risking Qt 5.3 schedule - I¹m all for it.
I would assume this is a
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 12:54:59, Sarajärvi Tony escreveu:
We've discovered (just lately) that in some cases incoming TCP packages are
bundled together. Somewhere along the line in our network code the first
TCP packet is drawn from buffers, but the remainders are left there.
That's normal. We
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if the
name server is not specified (which is the case with all the failing test
cases).
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 09:39:23, Gladhorn Frederik escreveu:
just like Albert said, it's not so much about the time until the next
release. It's more about delivering even more stable Qt releases with less
changes that are more reliable. While I generally think that we are doing
quite a good
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 17:28:40, Roland Winklmeier escreveu:
But my main question is, is there a chance QtDBus is shipped officially and
what needs to be done for that. I guess one point is to run the dbus unit
tests, but what else needs to be done to ship it at least in an
experimental state?
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Thiago Macieira
thiago.macie...@intel.comwrote:
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 16:01:05, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
It can't be related to my change as the same tests pass 100% of the time
on
my local setup (Ubuntu 13.10) and moreover my changes do not kick-in if
the
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 22:39:29, Mandeep Sandhu escreveu:
Ok, I'll dig in more into this problem. IF only I could replicate it
somehow, it'll be that much easier to fix! :/
If there's more debugging that could help you, you can modify the change to
add it to the test and we'll stage it during
Hi Thiago,
On Feb 5, 2014, at 6:18 PM, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
Em qua 05 fev 2014, às 11:58:50, Simon Hausmann escreveu:
I'm with Simon, this is very interesting stuff!
Thank you! :-)
I'm wondering if we could make use of your data to figure out what headers we
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 18:37:43, Shane McIntosh escreveu:
We've had precompilation support in qmake for a decade, but apparently we
use that in exactly 3 modules...
Hmm, it could also be interesting to look into these modules to see if
having them precompiled is justified by its hotness?
On 05/02/14 20:12, Heikkinen Jani wrote:
Hi all,
When did you tried that online installation?
On the 5th of February (few hours before sending the email).
Chris
Br,
Jani
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=digia@qt-project.org
On 05/02/14 20:12, Heikkinen Jani wrote:
Hi all,
When did you tried that online installation?
I just checked the Windows computer and this was Qt 5.2.0, not 5.2.1.
Chris
Br,
Jani
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=digia@qt-project.org
Am 06.02.2014 18:02, schrieb Thiago Macieira:
Em qui 06 fev 2014, às 17:28:40, Roland Winklmeier escreveu:
But my main question is, is there a chance QtDBus is shipped officially and
what needs to be done for that. I guess one point is to run the dbus unit
tests, but what else needs to be done
Hello!
I've tried to merge the patch https://codereview.qt-project.org/72692,
but CI fails. There is a line in logs:
cc1plus.exe: out of memory allocating 408 bytes
How may it be fixed?
Thank you!
___
Development mailing list
Shane McIntosh [mcint...@cs.queensu.ca] wrote:
Hi Qt developers!
My name is Shane. I’m a PhD student at Queen’s University in Canada.
I’ve been working on an approach for detecting build hotspots, i.e.,
files that not only take a long time to rebuild, but also change often.
We think
I already have 2 functions (which You can use from .qml as ListModel
(modelData)) - one that does show all windows -
X11support::windowListUnskipped and X11::windowList which checks if
the window is _NET_CLIENT_SKIP_TASKBAR
so I already do that. The only thing is I can't get the XEvents to work...
Hash mismatch was because qt5.2.1 content was replicating to the mirrors at
that time.
Br,
Jani
-Original Message-
From: Chris Gagneraud [mailto:chg...@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of
Christian Gagneraud
Sent: 6. helmikuuta 2014 22:30
To: Heikkinen Jani; development@qt-project.org
The eventFiler is already re-implemented as bool
X11Support::xEventFilter(XEvent * event),
the only problem is I want to start receiving the events, I guess it's
one line of code that should look like
m_instance-xEventFilter(event);
where m_instance is an instance of the class.
Trying to do so
27 matches
Mail list logo
