On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Paul Eggleton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday 05 June 2013 10:01:09 Saul Wold wrote: >> On 06/05/2013 09:57 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote: >> > On Wednesday 05 June 2013 09:46:49 Saul Wold wrote: >> >> On 06/05/2013 02:30 AM, Martin Jansa wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 07:01:50PM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote: >> >>>> qconfig.pri was not being loaded by qmake properly. This means Qt >> >>>> qmake projects are unable to query QT_ARCH, QT_VERSION and other >> >>>> variables defined in qconfig.pri. >> >>>> >> >>>> Export OE_QMAKE_QT_CONFIG, setting it to the location of qconfig.pri >> >>>> so that it can be located by qmake. >> >>> >> >>> There is such patch already: >> >>> http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2013-May/07831 >> >>> 4. >> >>> html >> >> >> >> Got lost in my queue, adding it for the next MUT. >> > >> > FWIW I am still concerned by the assertion in the commit message about it >> > causing undesirable behaviour. I'd want that checked out and the note >> > removed before we look at merging this. >> >> OK, I will shelf this until I hear more about the testing of this change >> regarding the original patch's note. > > So I tested a rebuild of qt4-x11-free with Felipe's patch and two of > Jonathan's ("qt4: fix QMAKE_QT_CONFIG being overwritten with empty value" and > "classes/qmake_base: allow parallel make"), and did not observe any unexpected > behaviour and buildhistory looks clean for qt itself and fotowall/quicky. So > I'd say feel free to throw these into MUT, but I think we need to drop the > note. >
Awesome. Thank you, Felipe _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
