> On Dec 30, 2014, at 9:23 PM, Philip Chimento <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 9:20 AM, John Ralls <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > On Dec 29, 2014, at 10:47 PM, Philip Chimento <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > webkit1gtk3 and webkit2gtk3 definitely won't work in that pull request; > > that's just what I renamed the svn and git versions to. In retrospect I'm > > not sure that's a great idea especially for webkit1gtk3, because 2.4.x > > won't build without a bunch of patches. > > So maybe I should just delete those two modules and push the rest. It’s all > about getting 1.10 going in modulesets-stable, right? > > Sure, I was going to keep those two modules in the hope of getting them to > build, but perhaps given how often WebKitGTK won't build on OSX, we'd be > better off always building from tarballs so we can patch them. > > For the brave souls we could include a WebKit-svn or WebKit-git module on > modulesets-unstable. > > > I was trying webkit2gtk3 today on stable and it looks like they removed > > support for the Quartz target from the cmake build system. Uh oh. > > That’s been a problem all along, ever since I first submitted patches for > Quartz back on 1.2. Not only were the patches rejected, but they changed the > Makefiles so that Mac and X11 were synonymous. Not too hard to patch around, > but annoying none the less. Is this similarly patchable or are we stuck at > 1.10? > > Well, I've at least gotten 2.4.7 (webkit1gtk3) to build, so we're not stuck > at 1.10. 2.4.7 is the last Autotools release, though they are still cutting > security releases from that branch. > > I'm trying to build 2.6.4 (webkit2gtk3) from a tarball now. The cmake files > were easy enough to patch. I'm hoping that they didn't remove the Quartz > target from the code altogether, just never got around to enabling it in the > new build system. > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:41 AM, John Ralls <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > On Dec 29, 2014, at 5:01 PM, John Ralls <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Didn’t build webkit2gtk3, though. Didn’t even start, because WebKitGtk > > seems to have dumped autotools in favor of cmake. That was a git build. > > I’ll try a stable version next. > > Stable fails with -arch i386: > > > ld: warning: ignoring file > > Source/JavaScriptCore/llint/Programs_LLIntOffsetsExtractor-LLIntOffsetsExtractor.o, > > file was built for unsupported file format ( 0xCF 0xFA 0xED 0xFE 0x07 0x00 > > 0x00 0x01 0x03 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x01 0x00 0x00 0x00 ) which is not the > > architecture being linked (i386): > > Source/JavaScriptCore/llint/Programs_LLIntOffsetsExtractor-LLIntOffsetsExtractor.o > > ld: warning: ignoring file ./.libs/libWTF.a, file was built for archive > > which is not the architecture being linked (i386): ./.libs/libWTF.a > > Undefined symbols for architecture i386: > > "_main", referenced from: > > implicit entry/start for main executable > > ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture i386 > > clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see > > invocation) > > I guess configure ignores the passed-in C.*FLAGS and deduces its own. Rude, > but fixable. > > Which version are you building? If it's a cmake version, apparently you have > to specify them at cmake time, not as makeargs. >
Sorry, by stable I meant 1.10. Regards, John Ralls
_______________________________________________ Gtk-osx-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-osx-devel-list
