On Thursday, 25 May 2017 12:33:49 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > On Tuesday, 23 May 2017 18:31:35 CEST Aleix Pol wrote: > > I would have looked into fixing it, but I'm not sure I understand why > > there's all the RPATH logic in place, so I'd prefer to hear from you > > first. > > I have removed the remains of the pre-ECM rpath handling. This also changed > binary output directories on Linux to follow KDE standards, so you might > want to do a clean build to avoid issues with outdated binaries in the > build dir. > > A good next step would also be to get it running on build.kde.org, so > > we can identify these issues. > > Indeed, I've requested CI coverage now.
Looks like in order to get CI coverage we need to move to kdereview (which is fine, I think it's ready for that), but that requires to know where this should end up afterwards. I guess the candidates are extragear/libs or frameworks? frameworks seems conceptually like the right place, but putting something there that is still fairly new and has seen little field testing seems sub-optimal. Opinions? Regards, Volker
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
