> On Nov 13, 2018, at 6:20 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov <neolit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 15:40, Dirk Hohndel <d...@hohndel.org > <mailto:d...@hohndel.org>> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 06:34:29PM +0800, Dirk Hohndel wrote: >>> >>> According to https://github.com/mxe/mxe/issues/2070 there is at least one >>> project that managed to get QtWebKit to build with MXE - but from what I >>> can tell this must have been on W64. Which made me wonder if it made sense >>> for us to have two Windows binaries... a 32bit binary without BLE support, >>> based on Qt 5.9 (just like the last one). And a 64bit binary, hopefully >>> with both BLE and QtWebKit support. After all, BLE requires the latest >>> Windows 10 and no one in their right mind is running this in 32bit mode, >>> right? >> >> I spoke too soon. I can't get this to work at all, so still no QtWebKit >> for Qt 5.10 or later under MXE :-( >> > > i guess we have the option to wait until Qt and MXE goes back to > QtWebKit officially. > such a build will have both BLE and QtWebkit for Windows? > > what i really wanted us to have, even if we don't release official / > experimental BLE support for Windows soon, is to have a Windows BLE > installer that i can point users to so that they can test their DCs. > right now i have to point them either to an old version (was it -46) > or to my own build which is super haxored and even lacks QImage > support. > > if -46 is sufficient for this we can continue recommending it.
I really want a 4.8.4 build to point people to. I need to go back and see how I created -46. Does it have maps? /D
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list email@example.com http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface