> On Sept. 13, 2015, 11:52 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > I'm in favor of the approach as this solves the problem that again and > > again [1] we have attempts of OSX-specific disabling of X11 in various > > frameworks and applications. > > > > The big problem on OSX seems to be that one doesn't want suport for X11, as > > it's not the windowing system. The code we have in our frameworks which is > > X11 specific performs runtime checks, thus is dead code on OSX anyway. For > > (to me unknown) reasons X11 gets pulled in during build on OSX though, > > causing either useless or crashy code to be included. Thus there are > > attempts to patch the frameworks instead of just fixing the cmake build > > command. > > > > I understand that it's a behavior change and thus dangerous. But that's the > > same for each framework which gets "fixed" in the way I describe above. In > > the end from what I understood from our OSX devs: they don't want X11 and > > it's from their perspective a bug that it gets picked up. To me it sounds > > like we should really break our rules to provide an overall better product. > > Thousand micro-edits in the frameworks are more dangerous than the one time > > explicit break. > > > > For what is worth I suggest that a warning could be printed by CMake, that > > those modules are not searched for and what's the command to override it. > > > > [1] There is already a huge list of reviews which I blocked because they > > were just wrong, but there are probably way more frameworks which got > > "fixed" where I just didn't notice the review. > > Samuel Gaist wrote: > Getting X11 in the process is pretty easy: install ffmpeg with macports > and you have it in (or at least parts of it). > > One problem I see about X11 on OS X is that it's not an official or > tested platform for Qt and like you said most of the code already disables it > at run time in KDE. I don't know the effort (in man power) needed to support > it properly. I think that would mean at least having a CI building Qt 5 and > running tests for that combo to ensure everything is running fine from a Qt > point of view. > > @martin, can you share that list ? It could help speed things up to build > a full KDE on OS X > > Allen Winter wrote: > right. I wouldn't object to going even further than this patch: Don't > check for X11 on MAC. make sure FOUND_X11 is always FALSE. Just like you > wouldn't check for X11 on Windows.
> @martin, can you share that list ? It could help speed things up to build a > full KDE on OS X sorry, I don't track them and wouldn't know how to find it quickly. In the end I don't think it matters to know those. Specify no X11 and all is fine. - Martin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125163/#review85307 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 12, 2015, 11:19 p.m., Samuel Gaist wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125163/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 12, 2015, 11:19 p.m.) > > > Review request for Extra Cmake Modules. > > > Repository: extra-cmake-modules > > > Description > ------- > > Disable X11,XCB etc. detection on OS X > > > Diffs > ----- > > kde-modules/KDECMakeSettings.cmake 0c997931abee8673ccecc66d122108c6f72bf9b1 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125163/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > KCrash build on OS X 10.8 > > > Thanks, > > Samuel Gaist > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-buildsystem mailing list Kde-buildsystem@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-buildsystem
