> 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?


subsurface mailing list

Reply via email to