Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

> On July 4, 2014, 7:22 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch instead? > > http://www.davidfaure.fr/2014/kprotocolmanager.cpp.diff > > David Faure wrote: > Actually, nothing beats a unittest :) Added, fix pushed. > > http://commits

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

> On July 4, 2014, 7:22 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch instead? > > http://www.davidfaure.fr/2014/kprotocolmanager.cpp.diff > > David Faure wrote: > Actually, nothing beats a unittest :) Added, fix pushed. > > http://commits

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

> On July 4, 2014, 7:22 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch instead? > > http://www.davidfaure.fr/2014/kprotocolmanager.cpp.diff > > David Faure wrote: > Actually, nothing beats a unittest :) Added, fix pushed. > > http://commits

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119110/ --- (Updated July 4, 2014, 9:58 p.m.) Status -- This change has been dis

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

> On July 4, 2014, 7:22 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch instead? > > http://www.davidfaure.fr/2014/kprotocolmanager.cpp.diff > > David Faure wrote: > Actually, nothing beats a unittest :) Added, fix pushed. > > http://commits

Re: [Kde-hardware-devel] OSX/MacPorts KDE CI System: Build failed for framework solid

On Thursday 03 July 2014 23:30:14 Marko Käning wrote: > So, please, apply this patch to solid's git repo and re-package the > KF 5.0.0 release accordingly. Done (v5.0.0-rc2 tag) -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5 _

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

> On July 4, 2014, 7:22 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch instead? > > http://www.davidfaure.fr/2014/kprotocolmanager.cpp.diff Actually, nothing beats a unittest :) Added, fix pushed. http://commits.kde.org/kio/842bc8008f5eed03698e8ec67351

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119110/#review61614 --- recursive mutexes are more expensive. Can you try this patch i

Re: KIO: thread safety commit broke Get hot new stuff

On 04/07/14 17:40, Marco Martin wrote: > HI all, > I recently noticed that the two GHNS windows in Plasma 5 very recently freeze > the whole process as soon the dialog opens > > I tried to bisect things and the problem is definitely in the commit > > 8cb050ea61dfb195fee0293c7c0eb87cb0a90654 > >

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119110/#review61611 --- I can confirm it fixes it here as well - Marco Martin On Ju

KIO: thread safety commit broke Get hot new stuff

HI all, I recently noticed that the two GHNS windows in Plasma 5 very recently freeze the whole process as soon the dialog opens I tried to bisect things and the problem is definitely in the commit 8cb050ea61dfb195fee0293c7c0eb87cb0a90654 in the KIO framework "KIO thread-safety: protect concur

Re: Allow to add a ActionButton in KPageDialog

Le vendredi 4 juillet 2014 16:46:24 Christoph Feck a écrit : > On Thursday 03 July 2014 19:50:35 laurent Montel wrote: > > Hi, > > During kdepim porting I saw that it was not possible to add a > > ActionButton as QButtonBox is protected. > > => we can do it if we create a derived class. > > But it’

Re: Allow to add a ActionButton in KPageDialog

On Thursday 03 July 2014 19:50:35 laurent Montel wrote: > Hi, > During kdepim porting I saw that it was not possible to add a > ActionButton as QButtonBox is protected. > => we can do it if we create a derived class. > But it’s not a very easy method for just add a button. > > I would like to add

Re: Review Request 119111: Make FindGettext compatible with the one provided by CMake

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119111/ --- (Updated July 4, 2014, 1:05 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks and J

Re: Review Request 119111: Make FindGettext compatible with the one provided by CMake

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119111/#review61601 --- cmake/modules/FindGettext.cmake

Re: Allow to add a ActionButton in KPageDialog

On Friday 04 July 2014 09:17:04 laurent Montel wrote: > Le vendredi 4 juillet 2014 08:13:58 Kevin Ottens a écrit : > > On Thursday 03 July 2014 19:50:35 laurent Montel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > During kdepim porting I saw that it was not possible to add a > > > ActionButton > > > as QButtonBox is prot

Re: Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119110/#review61597 --- I confirm this patch fixes the death lock. - Aleix Pol Gonza

Jenkins build became unstable: ktexteditor_master_qt5 #449

See ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

Re: kdelibs4support FindGettext

On 04/07/14 10:41, Alex Merry wrote: > On 04/07/14 10:07, Jonathan Riddell wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 10:01:46AM +0100, Alex Merry wrote: >>> On 03/07/14 22:06, Jonathan Riddell wrote: kdelibs4support ships an old copy of FindGettext.cmake. This is incompatible with the version s

Review Request 119111: Make FindGettext compatible with the one provided by CMake

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119111/ --- Review request for Build System, KDE Frameworks and Jonathan Riddell. Rep

Re: kdelibs4support FindGettext

On 04/07/14 10:07, Jonathan Riddell wrote: > On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 10:01:46AM +0100, Alex Merry wrote: >> On 03/07/14 22:06, Jonathan Riddell wrote: >>> kdelibs4support ships an old copy of FindGettext.cmake. This is >>> incompatible with the version shipping in cmake and causes some compile >

Review Request 119110: Release Blocker - KProtocolManager: Fix double mutex locking on a non recursive mutex

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/119110/ --- Review request for KDE Frameworks and David Faure. Repository: kio Desc

Re: kdelibs4support FindGettext

On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 10:01:46AM +0100, Alex Merry wrote: > On 03/07/14 22:06, Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > kdelibs4support ships an old copy of FindGettext.cmake. This is > > incompatible with the version shipping in cmake and causes some compile > > failures. Can I remove it? > > The interf

Re: kdelibs4support FindGettext

On 03/07/14 22:06, Jonathan Riddell wrote: > kdelibs4support ships an old copy of FindGettext.cmake. This is incompatible > with the version shipping in cmake and causes some compile failures. Can I > remove it? The interfaces of both files look like they should be the same. Do you have any in

Re: Allow to add a ActionButton in KPageDialog

Le vendredi 4 juillet 2014 08:13:58 Kevin Ottens a écrit : > On Thursday 03 July 2014 19:50:35 laurent Montel wrote: > > Hi, > > During kdepim porting I saw that it was not possible to add a ActionButton > > as QButtonBox is protected. > > => we can do it if we create a derived class. > > But it’s