Bo Peng wrote: >> What? Do we require qt=4.1, not qt>=4.1 nowadays? > > Yeap.
That's kind of absurd... what other problems qt>4.1 gives? A/
Bo Peng wrote: >> What? Do we require qt=4.1, not qt>=4.1 nowadays? > > Yeap.
That's kind of absurd... what other problems qt>4.1 gives? A/