On Jan. 26, 2014, 7:22 a.m., István Kapcsándi wrote:
src/CMakeLists.txt, line 17
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/diff/3/?file=234996#file234996line17
maybe I'm wrong but my logic says that this should be
install(FILES ${kglobalaccel_component_xml} DESTINATION
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review48281
---
src/CMakeLists.txt
On Jan. 17, 2014, 8:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
Hrvoje Senjan wrote:
On Jan. 17, 2014, 5:39 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
and what if kdelibs (really, not kde-runtime?) from SC4 is not installed?
KF/5 would be broken then, would it not?
What about having a common data package downstream?
No it wouldn't be broken, it would continue to compile using the .xml
On Jan. 17, 2014, 9:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
Hrvoje Senjan wrote:
On Jan. 17, 2014, 8:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
Hrvoje Senjan wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/
---
(Updated Jan. 21, 2014, 2:49 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Frameworks and
On Jan. 17, 2014, 8:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
Hrvoje Senjan wrote:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47879
---
I like this approach better (though I don't know whether
On Jan. 21, 2014, 2:55 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
I like this approach better (though I don't know whether that's causing
problems on the DBus side). Maybe we could keep the files as they are and
just rename at install?
new patch attached
- Jonathan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47884
---
something went wrong with the latest patch. CMake looks fine
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/
---
(Updated Jan. 21, 2014, 3:10 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Frameworks and
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47887
---
Ship it!
Ship It!
- Martin Gräßlin
On Jan. 21, 2014, 4:10
On Jan. 21, 2014, 4:16 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
something went wrong with the latest patch. CMake looks fine but it
includes the renamed files.
Jonathan Riddell wrote:
Maybe I'm going mad but I don't see any renamed files in it. Here's the
same patch in a pastebin
On Jan. 21, 2014, 3:16 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
something went wrong with the latest patch. CMake looks fine but it
includes the renamed files.
Maybe I'm going mad but I don't see any renamed files in it. Here's the same
patch in a pastebin
http://paste.ubuntu.com/6792111/
-
On Jan. 21, 2014, 3:23 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
Ship It!
Many thanks to Jonathan for working on this, and Martin for giving a green
light! ;-)
- Hrvoje
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47894
---
This review has been submitted with commit
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/
---
(Updated Jan. 21, 2014, 4:24 p.m.)
Status
--
This change has been
On Jan. 17, 2014, 8:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
Hrvoje Senjan wrote:
On Jan. 17, 2014, 8:43 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote:
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and kf5 to different
prefixes. I think this needs a different approach, but please don't ask me
for it. I'm lacking ideas how we could solve this upstream.
What about just renaming
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/
---
Review request for KDE Frameworks and Martin Gräßlin.
Repository:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47583
---
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115079/ is matching part in
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47587
---
and what if kdelibs (really, not kde-runtime?) from SC4 is
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115078/#review47614
---
this would break my workflow given that I install kde4 and
24 matches
Mail list logo
