On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Richard Purdie < richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 16:58 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 05:56:31PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Saul Wold wrote: > > > > > > > On 06/05/2013 01:10 PM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 02:43:07PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Nicolas Dechesne < > > > >> > nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org linaro.org > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Saul Wold < > sgw@linux.intel.com > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> On 06/05/2013 10:12 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Saul Wold > > > >> > > > >> > >>> >>> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> On 06/05/2013 09:32 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Saul Wold > > > >> > > > >> > >>> > > >> sgw@linux.intel.com>> > > > >> > >>> > > >> > > >> >>**> > > > >> > >>> wrote: > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> You could just directly put the > nativesdk-libx11 > > > >> in place > > > >> > >>> of the > > > >> > >>> variable, no need to have the variable > there. > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> yes, that's what I had initially, but found it > was > > > >> less easy to > > > >> > >>> read... > > > >> > >>> with X11DEPENDS it's more 'obvious' that there is > > > >> something > > > >> > >>> special.. > > > >> > >>> that said, i can make the change if that's really > > > >> needed. > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> We do use the X11DEPENDS elsewhere when there are > multiple > > > >> > >>> dependencies, but I also found cases where we just > > > >> include the > > > >> > >>> dependency directly in the test. I was trying pick a > > > >> direction: > > > >> > >>> single entry no X11DEPENDS, multiple entries use > > > >> X11DEPENDS. > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> Comments, flames, ... > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> Yes; I sent this patch in Febuary: > > > >> > >>> > > > >> http://patchwork.openembedded.****org/patch/44759/ > > >> patchwork.openembedded.org/**patch/44759/< > http://patchwork.openembedded.org/patch/44759/> > > > >> > > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> Please use this one instead of the recent one. > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >> Well reading back on that, it looks like I was waiting > for an > > > >> > >> EXTRA_OECONF or related change to the autoconf scripts. > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> Sau! > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > hmm. ok, sorry Otavio, i missed the other patch. I will > check > > > >> on my side > > > >> > > too about EXTRA_OECONF. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > Nicolas, don't worry. It is normal to end redoing some stuff. > > > >> > > > > >> > Last time I checked it had no support in Qt build system; I > am > > > >> not sure if > > > >> > it uses or not the host headers (in case they exist) but it > needs > > > >> testing > > > >> > to be sure. > > > >> > > > >> I can confirm that it does not link against host X11 when built > w/o > > > >> that > > > >> dependency and nativesdk has no x11 libs/headers. As I > previously > > > >> mentioned, > > > >> we've been using this fix for over 6 months on several releases > built > > > >> on > > > >> different machines w/o problems... > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> In this case the patch can be merged 'as is'. > > > >> > > > >> > > > > I am still concerned about a floating dependency here, imagine the > > > > following: > > > > > > > > Build the toolchain with X11 enabled, nativesdk-libx11 is build, now > > > > rebuild with X11 disabled, the dependency is gone, but the libraries > and > > > > headers still exist in the sysroot and thus the configure will still > enable > > > > x11 in qte, bad things happen. > > > > > > > > > > I expect different distro features to have different build dirs. No? > > > > > > > > > > We need to have a disable flag to autotools. > > > > > > > > > > The qmake based system does not provide this; so to support it, it will > > > need to be a hack ... > > > > I agree with Otavio here - seems like you are after a rare corner case > here... > > We need determinism in the builds. Yes in this case it might be hard to > achieve but I do think we need to achieve it. > > So this patch isn't going in until we can avoid this option magically > floating, sorry. I've said this before and I've not changed my mind. > It is completely deterministic that it is *broken* for every one not using a DISTRO with X11; this is deterministic enough for me to justify it go in. As most of people didn't complain about this before, it is clear most use *x11* feature and thus this won't affect them. I see no point in delay it; complete determinism is better - sure - but a broken Qt toolchain for x11less systems does not improve it. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://projetos.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750