Kornel, the LYX_QT_... are defined in qt_platforms.h in the qt4 directory (patch 6). The patch 7 has been updated and depends on patch 6.
Benjamin On 01 Mar 2014, at 11:27 , Benjamin Piwowarski <benjamin.piwowar...@lip6.fr> wrote: > Here is a patch following this strategy, and an update patch for bug #8925 - > http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/8925 > > Benjamin > > <0006-Qt5-support-for-Mac.patch><0007-Fix-bug-8925-menubar-not-displayed-in-Mac-OS-10.9.patch> > > > > On 28 Feb 2014, at 23:23 , Benjamin Piwowarski <benjamin.piwowar...@lip6.fr> > wrote: > >> >> On 28 Feb 2014, at 23:01 , Georg Baum <georg.b...@post.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: >> >>>>> I can't comment on the cmake part, but the C++ changes look good. To our >>>>> Mac expperts: Is there any reason why they are not already in? >>>> I guess this is because since QT_WS_MACX was not defined anymore in QT5, >>>> the mac specific parts were not compiled anymore and hence did not trigger >>>> any problem. >>> >>> I researched a bit, and there are indeed subtle differences: Q_OS_MACX is >>> also provided on the oldest qt release supported by LyX (4.5.0). However, >>> with qt 4.x, Q_OS_MACX is not equivalent to Q_WS_MACX: If you build for X11 >>> you get Q_WS_X11 and Q_OS_MACX. >>> >>> BTW, the other macros we use (Q_WS_WIN and Q_WS_X11) have no direct Q_OS >>> equivalent either, but they need to be changed as well in qt5. I don't know >>> where to go from here. AFAIK Vincent did compile already for windows with >>> qt5. Why did that work without the changed macros? Also, the qt sources >>> themselves still use the Q_WS macros, although I could not find any place >>> where they are defined. Is that simply broken code? I can't believe. Should >>> we define our own and not use the QT ones? >> >> It seems that it would be better to have LyX macros handling the following >> cases: >> - QT + OS X => LYX_QT_OSX >> - QT5 + OS X => LYX_QT5_OSX >> - QT4 + OS X => LYX_QT4_OSX >> - QT4 + OS X + COCOA => LYX_QT_OSX_COCOA >> - QT4 + OS X + X11 => LYX_QT_OSX_X11 >> >> this would make the code more readable and easier to maintain IMHO. >> >> I can update my patch in this direction if needed. In that case, where >> should I put the macro definitions? >> >> Benjamin > > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
