[Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans

Knoll Lars Lars.Knoll at theqtcompany.com
Tue Aug 18 13:16:24 CEST 2015

On 18/08/15 09:56, "development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org on behalf of Sorvig Morten" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany.com at qt-project.org on behalf of Morten.Sorvig at theqtcompany.com> wrote:

>> On 18 Aug 2015, at 07:46, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote:
>> On Monday 13 July 2015 18:44:40 Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 08 July 2015 13:42:12 Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>>> The only compiler I currently know that will have problems with this is
>>>> the  Intel compiler on OS X when using libc++ older than Subversion
>>>> r215305. Unfortunately, _LIBCPP_VERSION has been at value 1101 since way
>>>> before that change. To restore functionality, I will revert
>>>> 1b961e8b5d508d054e31c0050f27891606714393 after 5.6 branches off from dev.
>>> Upon further investigation, it turns out that ICC has worked around the
>>> libc++  problem since version 15.0 by providing its own std::atomic
>>> implementation when __clang__ is defined (probably a mistake and should
>>> have been a check for _LIBCPP_VERSION).
>> Looks like std::atomic that came with the latest XCode that still runs on OS X 
>> 10.8 is also broken with Clang.
>> Choices:
>> 1) drop the ability to build Qt and applications using an old XCode
>> 2) keep qatomic_x86.h for OS X.
>> So, Mac people: is it ok to drop OS X 10.8 as a *build* platform? This should 
>> not affect using it as a target.
>CI testing may be sufficient reason to keep Qt building on 10.8, unless we have/gain the the capability to have separate “build” and “test” machines.

Longer term, we could add that capability, but we don't have it yet, and the focus for the CI is on other, more important items currently.

I'd say we keep it building on 10.8 for now, and use qatomic_x86. IIRC the file was anyway still being used by at least one other platform.


More information about the Development mailing list