[Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes
Shawn.Rutledge at qt.io
Fri Apr 28 08:54:09 CEST 2017
> On 27 Apr 2017, at 16:59, Jake Petroules <Jake.Petroules at qt.io> wrote:
> Anyways, iOS 11 will likely drop support for 32-bit applications entirely (i.e. they will not launch because 32-bit system libs will be GONE). So I agree we should stop shipping 32-bit slices in our binary distributions of Qt for iOS. We should not deliberately break 32-bit support though (and it's hard to do this accidentally anyways).
Well, the latest iOS versions don’t run on devices of a certain age (and in other cases, you can upgrade but you’d better not, because you’ll regret it) - that’s their way of shaking you down. But as long as developers can keep enabling continued use of those devices somehow rather than sending them promptly to the shredder as soon as Apple wants you to, I think we should support them in their efforts, or at least not interfere.
> On 27 Apr 2017, at 17:00, Jake Petroules <Jake.Petroules at qt.io> wrote:
>> On Apr 27, 2017, at 7:40 AM, BogDan Vatra <bogdan.vatra at kdab.com> wrote:
>> For Android I'd like to support 64 bit platforms (arm and x86)
> They are already supported. Feel free to compile Qt with the appropriate -arch options. Do you mean you want them in CI and want us to start shipping binaries for android amd64 and arm64?
> I'm not sure there's enough 64-bit devices out there to justify it yet. Android moves very slow...
Lollipop came out in 2014. And there were 64-bit devices available by then. So I suspect the majority of new devices are 64-bit by now.
If _users_ are slow to upgrade their devices, that’s really good on them, not going along with the planned obsolescence nonsense which is purely harmful: to your wallet, to the environment, to the sense of guilt that you feel when you do the wrong thing, and increasing inequality in the economy. Apple gets a black mark in my book for trying so hard to remove that choice.
More information about the Development