[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: qt-copy or qt-2.3.0?
From:       Melchior FRANZ <a8603365 () unet ! univie ! ac ! at>
Date:       2001-04-16 13:02:54
[Download RAW message or body]

* Daniel Molkentin -- Monday 16 April 2001 14:10:
> Am Montag 16 April 2001 13:39 schrieb dep:
> > [2.2.4 or 2.3]
> > if one is preferred, is it required?
> 
> KDE CVS can be compiled with either Qt 2.2.4 or Qt 2.3.
> The latter enables KDE to use antialiased fonts. qt-copy is Qt 2.3 +
> some changes backported from Trolltechs internal CVS. 

In qt-copy the bug has been fixed which led to thousands of bug
reports: when AA was used but XftConfig's dir settings pointed to
invalid/non-existant TT directories, then Qt segfaulted and (of
course) KDE didn't start at all. Now in this case KDE starts 
normally, there are just no TT fonts. So if you have already set
everything to use TT fonts, you'll see no fonts at all: Naked
KDE. But that's OK, although using a default font wouldn't
be too bad. One that is so ugly that you can't ignore it. And
pink ...  ;-)

So yes, qt-copy is a good choice. But I wouldn't recommend it
to simple users, because there are no binaries available(?) and
even worse than people complaining about a segfaulting Qt is
thousands of people wanting to know how to check out CVS and
how to compile it ...

m.
 
>> Visit http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]