To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66722


User sb changed the following:

                What    |Old value                 |New value
================================================================================
                      CC|'hr,rt,vq'                |'ebischoff,hr,kendy,pl,rt,
                        |                          |vq'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jul 13 01:44:21 -0700 
2006 -------
1 shell/source/backends/kdebe:  I see four possible solutions, but would like
those who feel responsible for the code (ebischoff, kendy?) to decide which to
choose:

1.1  Thre road already taken with qstring_wrapper.h (but rejected by pjanik), of
individually wrapping unclean external headers in "#pragma GCC system_header." 
A "grep '[<"][kq]' shell/source/backends/kdebe/*" brings up seven hits for
potentially unclean external headers: kapplication.h, kprotocolmanager.h,
kemailsettings.h, kglobalsettings.h qstring.h, qglobal.h, qaccessible.h.  This
fix would be the most specific.

1.2  Similar to 1.1, but create a single wrapper that includes all the unclean
external headers (if this does not cause other problems).

1.3  Disable "warnings are errors" for all warnings in
shell/source/backends/kdebe/ by adding EXTERNAL_WARNINGS_NOT_ERRORS=TRUE to
shell/source/backends/kdebe/makefile.mk:1.2.  This fix would be the least
specific and IMO only a last resort.

1.4  There obviously are clean versions of the included headers (i.e., at Sun
Hamburg we do not get any warnings in shell/source/backends/kdebe).  Require
those versions as a prerequisite for building OOo.  (Probably not feasible.)

When doing any of 1.2--1.4, the introduction of qstring_wrapper.h should be 
undone.


2 vcl/unx/kde:  That is strange, as in a small test scenario the explicit
instantiation did help.  Anyway, it seems the only feasible solution here is the
analogue to 1.3 above, then.  pl, any opinion?  pjanik, can you do the necessary
changes?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to