On Monday 19 February 2007 12:56:55 pm Georg Baum wrote:
> I will be away now, so please put this in if it is OK.
Done.
> Georg
--
José Abílio
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 07:41:04PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | Not really. The namespace was put in by a script...
>
> Sure, then the script was buggy.
Sure. There was a trade-off involved comparing the time to come up with
a perfect script compared with the time to fix a dozen or so er
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 01:17:56PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | José,
| > |
| > | can this go in? It moves the includes out of the lyx namespace and is
| > | needed for gcc 3.2. IMO it is a bug
Am Montag, 19. Februar 2007 16:29 schrieb Michael Abshoff:
> You need to set your LD_LIBRARY_PATH to point to the libstdc++.so that
was
> build with the compiler you used. Then it should run just fine.
No ;-) libstdc++ is not the problem, that can be found, but I would need to
recompile qt with
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 01:17:56PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | José,
> |
> | can this go in? It moves the includes out of the lyx namespace and is
> | needed for gcc 3.2. IMO it is a bug that later gcc accepts this code.
>
> I woulnd't go tha
Hello George
> MSVC is not affected, since the code in question is only used on unix.
>
> With the attached patch I am now able to compile with gcc 3.2 and 3.3. I
> don't understand why it does not work without. Due to the changed C++ ABI
> from gcc 3.4 on I could not run the resulting binaries,
Am Montag, 19. Februar 2007 12:57 schrieb José Matos:
> On Monday 19 February 2007 11:48:57 am Georg Baum wrote:
> > José,
> >
> > can this go in? It moves the includes out of the lyx namespace and is
> > needed for gcc 3.2.
>
> Yes, if the purpose is to get gcc 3.2 working. :-)
>
> > IMO it is
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| José,
|
| can this go in? It moves the includes out of the lyx namespace and is
| needed for gcc 3.2. IMO it is a bug that later gcc accepts this code.
I woulnd't go that far. But it is but that we have written the code in
the first place.
--
L
On Monday 19 February 2007 11:48:57 am Georg Baum wrote:
> José,
>
> can this go in? It moves the includes out of the lyx namespace and is
> needed for gcc 3.2.
Yes, if the purpose is to get gcc 3.2 working. :-)
> IMO it is a bug that later gcc accepts this code.
Hmm, not sure about this pa
