Re: 2.4.0 plan for #12215 [LyX crashes with async processes (Qt6 only)] ?

Op 14-11-2022 om 13:46 schreef Thibaut Cuvelier: On Mon, 14 Nov 2022, 11:45 Pavel Sanda, > wrote: On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:16:05PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > If no one fixes it in time, shall we postpone 2.4.0 No, I wouldn't do that. > or proceed

Re: Qt & gcc requirements for 2.4

On Mon, 2022-11-14 at 11:25 +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote: > - real tested combinations: >   What are the real Qt numbers/gcc(/..) numbers we use? I use qt 5.15.7 with gcc 12 (and build snapshoots of gcc 13). I use 2.4 for my own work, including preparing lecture some minutes before the real classes a

Re: xdg-open for 2.4.0?

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:54:29AM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:31:45PM +, José Matos wrote: > > > It seems there are two questions: > > > > > > (1) Are we still concerned about a security issue? > > > (2) Regardless of a security issue, is xdg-open what we want? > >

Re: 2.4.0 plan for #12215 [LyX crashes with async processes (Qt6 only)] ?

On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 06:28:44AM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Am Freitag, dem 11.11.2022 um 21:32 +0100 schrieb Thibaut Cuvelier: > > > The following issue seems pretty bad: > > > > > >   https://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/12215 > > > > > > Is there someone who is brave enough with time to a

Re: Qt & gcc requirements for 2.4

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:25:27AM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote: > Hi, > > since (at least) fff28c57561a our master does not compile with gcc 4.9 > anymore. > Also it seems that there is agreement that Qt4 won't be supported for 2.4 > either. I think we are leaning that way but I don't think we've

Re: [Qt4???] Re: [PATCH] Show branches from master document in branch inset dialog

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:51:34AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 03:12:40PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2022 at 05:05:43PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > Still, I am wondering why we insist on supporting Qt4 for 2.4.0 > > > (especially > > > co

Re: 2.4.0 plan for #12215 [LyX crashes with async processes (Qt6 only)] ?

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022, 11:45 Pavel Sanda, wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:16:05PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > If no one fixes it in time, shall we postpone 2.4.0 > > No, I wouldn't do that. > > > or proceed with 2.4.0 and state that Qt6 is not officially supported > because of #12215? > >

Re: xdg-open for 2.4.0?

On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 10:31:45PM +, José Matos wrote: > > It seems there are two questions: > > > > (1) Are we still concerned about a security issue? > > (2) Regardless of a security issue, is xdg-open what we want? I pushed against xdg-open long time ago when debian maintainers offered it

Re: 2.4.0 plan for #12215 [LyX crashes with async processes (Qt6 only)] ?

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 03:16:05PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > If no one fixes it in time, shall we postpone 2.4.0 No, I wouldn't do that. > or proceed with 2.4.0 and state that Qt6 is not officially supported because > of #12215? I see three options: 1) we don't support QT6 and break durin

Qt & gcc requirements for 2.4

Hi, since (at least) fff28c57561a our master does not compile with gcc 4.9 anymore. Also it seems that there is agreement that Qt4 won't be supported for 2.4 either. What should we state in the INSTALL now? I guess that boils down to two separate questions: - minimal (theoretical) requirements: