ralf.habacker at freenet.de
Tue Feb 10 22:42:27 CET 2004
On Tuesday 10 February 2004 17:26, Christian Hohnstaedt wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2004 at 03:49:40PM +0100, IVAN DE JESUS DERAS TABORA wrote:
> > --- Christian Hohnstaedt <christian at hohnstaedt.de>
> > escribió: > Hello List,
> > > Is your port already usable ?
> > Not at all!!! But you could see some screenshots in
> > qt3-Win32 page!!!
> looks not so bad..
> > >Is it actively developed ?
> > No!! :-(
> sounds bad..
> > > Can I participate ?
> > Yes, that would be great, we need developers!!!
> I'll try to compile it for me, I checked out the CVS.
> Are there any newer versions than CVS HEAD ? :-)
We have currently two active branches. QT_WIN32_3_BRANCH, which is based on qt
3.1 and QT_WIN32_3_2_BRANCH, based on qt3.2. (please don't use HEAD branch
of qt3 subdir, it contains an old qt3.0.4 release and is broken)
the qt3.1 related branched is about 90% working and we are on the end of stage
2 of the roadmap found on
In the past, Richard Lärkand and Ivan has done great work on this branch, but
unfortunally Richard has stopped further contributions some time ago, so Ivan
is currently alone with this port. :-(
So the best seems to me to checkout the sources and see what is running and
what not. (I remember that one user reported about some performance problems
he detected in the mailing list.)
My personal next actions are (as stated in my previous mail) implementing
stage 3, but currently there is to do a decision between A. first upgrading
to qt3.2 or B. using the qt3.1 branch for this and upgrade then.
Currently we would like more to upgrade to qt 3.2 branch first,which is
already updated with the qt3.1 branch patches, but unfortunally qt3.2 has a
different internal font handling which does not work yet. If someone if able
to fix this we are able to go on with qt3.2.
> > Well, no comments!!!
> > >How far is the light at the end of the tunnel ?
> Did not expect it is as dark :-(
> Other idea:
> Is there anybody with enough linker, BFD, MSVC binary knowledge
> to make the MSVC non-commercial dlls link to g++ ?
This will be not possible because the application binary interface of c++
compiler are not compatible in symbol name mangling, virtual table structure
structure alignments and more.
> Or is it possible at all with a usual amount of work ?
> I mean: The compiled code is there, running on i386 hardware,
> we only have to link it - right ?
More information about the kde-cygwin