On 2020/06/15 08:30, Andrea Fleckenstein wrote: > Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> writes: > > > On 2020/06/14 09:40, Andrea Fleckenstein wrote: > >> Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >> > The port was stuck due to not having qtwebengine which is needed > >> > for newer versions. > >> > > >> > There is a big enough change in build layout for the newer version > >> > that the current port isn't a good basis, so OK sthen@ to remove it. > >> > >> I'm keen to start work on the update. Anyone else been working on it? > >> Will the old port really be no use at all that I should just start from > >> scratch? > > > > I had a look at it a few times in the past, before we had qtwebengine > > (trying > > to switch it back to qtwebkit) but didn't get anywhere with that approach. > > Compared to the existing port, the files are in a different location, > > the dependencies are different with the move to qt5, and the file layout > > is different enough that the install target wasn't usable. There's not > > much else left to the existing port. > > And it doesn't seem like a straightforward > python port either, there's a Makefile that sets up its own python > venv, installs setuptools etc. and then builds. > Can I just skip this target and have the lang/python module handle > it for me, or do you think I'm better off just allowing the Makefile to > do it?
You'll probably need to skip that, I expect it will try to download things itself which is not allowed in a ports build.
