On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 21:39 +0200, Erik van Pienbroek wrote: > try to rewrite the Qt .spec file. In the end I managed to get Qt > compiled without the hacks which were originally used. As a bonus
Great! Thanks for your work! > around this limitation, but I think we should discuss changing it to a > new name as we should limit the number of patches required to an > absolute minimum. I'm fine with changing it to reduce our workload and be more consistent with other similar projects. I don't think we have that many users already who would need to adjust their build scripts.. > libraries as they're all bundled inside the Qt DLL's. So the question is > whether we should confirm to the way upstream wants it or the way Fedora > wants it. Comments are welcome. I would prefer the fedora way if it's doable without excessive packager workload... Thanks again, Tom _______________________________________________ mingw mailing list mingw@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mingw
