Hi Benjamin!
El sáb., 20 de oct. de 2018 09:18, Benjamin Mesing
escribió:
> Hi,
> just in case someone stumbles across this thread..
> I finally figured out the cause of the compile problem:
> My upload included the generated .qmake.stash file.
Yet another qmake hidden file. I should create a
Hi,
just in case someone stumbles across this thread..
I finally figured out the cause of the compile problem:
My upload included the generated .qmake.stash file. The file got
regenerated on "make clean" and therefore was bundled by debuild.
Deleting .qmake.stash as the final step in the "clean" ta
Hi and sorry for the long delay!
On 15 November 2017 at 16:40, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried adding the export QT_SELECT statement to the rules file with no
> difference. Also, I tried compiling on another porterbox
> (partch.debian.org) and everything did compile fine.
>
> I am out of
Hi,
I tried adding the export QT_SELECT statement to the rules file with no
difference. Also, I tried compiling on another porterbox
(partch.debian.org) and everything did compile fine.
I am out of ideas. What do you mean by "ask for a give back".
Any other ideas?
Regards
Ben
On Thu, 2017-11
If you add it in debian/rules then you know it will be set for the whole
package build instead of just what the Makefile covers.
It might also be a qtchooser issue, specially if you can't reproduce it on
a porter box. If you want try another porter box and if everything goes ok
ask for a give back
Hi,
I am still not having any luck. I did add "export QT_SELECT=qt5" in my
Makefile (which is directly called by debian/rules from the clean/build
targets) but the error remains the same.
To reproduce the problem, I have logged into a porterbox (mipsel, which
failed on a buildd). However, for me
On 1 November 2017 at 15:04, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> Hi Lisandro,
>
> thanks for the quick help. I will try this. Everything looked fine to
> me, because the qt5-moc was used. So, if I understand the fix
> correctly, I have to tell the qt5-moc to actually expect qt5 code.
>
> It is a little bit c
Hi Lisandro,
thanks for the quick help. I will try this. Everything looked fine to
me, because the qt5-moc was used. So, if I understand the fix
correctly, I have to tell the qt5-moc to actually expect qt5 code.
It is a little bit confusing, all my makefile are generated from .pro
files with "qma
Here it is:
/usr/lib/qt5/bin/moc -DQT_NO_DEBUG -DQT_WIDGETS_LIB -DQT_GUI_LIB
-DQT_XML_LIB -DQT_NETWORK_LIB -DQT_CORE_LIB --include
.moc/moc_predefs.h -I/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/qt5/mkspecs/linux-g++
-I/<>/src -I/<>/src
-I/usr/include/tagcoll-2.0.14 -I/usr/include/aarch64-linux-gnu/qt5
-I/usr/inc
Sorry, I'm wrong, you are doing it in the Makefile :-/
OK, I'm kind of lost now :-(
--
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
On 1 November 2017 at 13:38, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> Hi Folks (please CC, I am not subscribed),
>
> I ported packagesearch to QT5 due to the removal of QT4. On my machine
> everything compiled fine. But when I uploaded the package, almost all
> buildds failed to build (except for the amd64 one).
Hi Folks (please CC, I am not subscribed),
I ported packagesearch to QT5 due to the removal of QT4. On my machine
everything compiled fine. But when I uploaded the package, almost all
buildds failed to build (except for the amd64 one).
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=packagesearch&
On 1 November 2017 at 13:38, Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> Hi Folks (please CC, I am not subscribed),
>
> I ported packagesearch to QT5 due to the removal of QT4. On my machine
> everything compiled fine. But when I uploaded the package, almost all
> buildds failed to build (except for the amd64 one).
13 matches
Mail list logo
