Re: Review Request: KF5 - Q_OS_* not defined

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 9:07 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > Ah, yes, this is a porting error. KDE4 cmake stuff used to define Q_WS_* > > cmake variables, but nothing does that in KF5. > > > > I trust you that "WIN32" and "APPLE" are right here, no experience with > > that. > > > > However this shoul

Re: ECM and FindFoo.cmake files

On 5 August 2012 16:08, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Sunday 05 August 2012, George Goldberg wrote: > >> What is the policy on moving FindFoo.cmake files from frameworks to >> ECM or upstream. In particular, I have found the following ones still >> existing in the various tier1 and tier2 migrated

Re: Review Request: Make kcodecs framework build standalone

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105860/ --- (Updated Aug. 5, 2012, 2:24 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks and Da

ECM and FindFoo.cmake files

Hi, What is the policy on moving FindFoo.cmake files from frameworks to ECM or upstream. In particular, I have found the following ones still existing in the various tier1 and tier2 migrated frameworks: kcoreaddons --FindFAM.cmake kidletime --FindX11.cmake --FindX11XCB.cmake --FindXCB.cmake soli

Re: Review Request: remove FindLibLZMA.cmake from karchive framework

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 3:11 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > Where have you seen this ? > > CMake 2.8.8 does not, and 2.8.9 has not yet been released. > > Ah, seems my distro packaged the RC's of 2.8.9 which is where I got it from. This change can wait until its released and whenever we depend

Re: ECM and FindFoo.cmake files

On Sunday 05 August 2012, George Goldberg wrote: > On 5 August 2012 16:08, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Sunday 05 August 2012, George Goldberg wrote: > >> What is the policy on moving FindFoo.cmake files from frameworks to > >> ECM or upstream. In particular, I have found the following ones st

Re: Review Request: remove FindLibLZMA.cmake from karchive framework

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105866/#review16896 --- Where have you seen this ? CMake 2.8.8 does not, and 2.8.9 has

Re: ECM and FindFoo.cmake files

On Sunday 05 August 2012, George Goldberg wrote: > Hi, > > What is the policy on moving FindFoo.cmake files from frameworks to > ECM or upstream. In particular, I have found the following ones still > existing in the various tier1 and tier2 migrated frameworks: Move them one by one to e-c-m when

Re: Review Request: Don't lose the original CMAKE_MODULE_PATH

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 9:12 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > tier2/kconfig/CMakeLists.txt, line 7 > > > > > > Ah, damn, there are conflicting goals here. > > > > We removed ${CMAKE_MODULE_PATH} on purpose so that eac

Re: Review Request: KF5 - Q_OS_* not defined

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 9:07 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > Ah, yes, this is a porting error. KDE4 cmake stuff used to define Q_WS_* > > cmake variables, but nothing does that in KF5. > > > > I trust you that "WIN32" and "APPLE" are right here, no experience with > > that. > > > > However this shoul

Re: More work available

I think I mistakenly started building master branch somehow which put a bunch of generated files in my source tree. I think what he meant to document in the wiki was the way to find out if /usr/include headers were mistakenly being found (make VERBOSE=1) but since that's not supposed to happen, ma

Re: Review Request: remove FindLibLZMA.cmake from karchive framework

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105866/ --- (Updated Aug. 5, 2012, 9:43 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, Mario

Re: Review Request: Don't lose the original CMAKE_MODULE_PATH

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 9:12 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > tier2/kconfig/CMakeLists.txt, line 7 > > > > > > Ah, damn, there are conflicting goals here. > > > > We removed ${CMAKE_MODULE_PATH} on purpose so that eac

Re: Review Request: Don't lose the original CMAKE_MODULE_PATH

> On Aug. 5, 2012, 9:12 a.m., David Faure wrote: > > tier2/kconfig/CMakeLists.txt, line 7 > > > > > > Ah, damn, there are conflicting goals here. > > > > We removed ${CMAKE_MODULE_PATH} on purpose so that eac

Re: Review Request: Fix finding the QtMimeTypes headers when compiling frameworks individually

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105862/ --- (Updated Aug. 5, 2012, 9:28 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks and Da

Re: Review Request: Make kcodecs framework build standalone

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105860/ --- (Updated Aug. 5, 2012, 9:22 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks and Da

Re: More work available

On Saturday 04 August 2012 09:41:28 Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Saturday 04 August 2012 00:52:16 David Faure wrote: > > On Friday 03 August 2012 13:57:54 Jeremy Whiting wrote: > > > Hey David, > > > > > > I started taking a stab at the KApplication -> QApplication > > > fix/conversions, then pulled a

Re: Review Request: Don't lose the original CMAKE_MODULE_PATH

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105863/#review16879 --- tier2/kconfig/CMakeLists.txt

Re: Review Request: KF5 - Q_OS_* not defined

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105868/#review16878 --- Ship it! Ah, yes, this is a porting error. KDE4 cmake stuff us

Re: Review Request: libinqt5 - Windows fixes

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105867/#review16877 --- Thanks for looking at the Windows build of KDE Frameworks! Very