| Summary: | app-office/texmaker-4.4.1: version bump, add qt5 build option | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Malte E. <maltee> |
| Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Justin Lecher (RETIRED) <jlec> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | jlec, qt, tex |
| Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | EBUILD |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
| Bug Depends on: | 467712 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
| Attachments: |
texmaker-4.0.1-r1.ebuild
texmaker-4.4.1.ebuild |
||
|
Description
Malte E.
2013-03-12 23:05:06 UTC
Created attachment 347178 [details] texmaker-4.0.1-r1.ebuild You can test this ebuild with my qt5.eclass => https://raw.github.com/okias/qt/master/eclass/qt5.eclass Copy qt5.eclass into "/usr/portage/eclass" go to "/usr/portage/app-office/texmaker" copy there ebuild, run "repoman manifest" any try it :) (I'd like to try it, but it depends on 150M packages - no tex installed ;-) ) Can we just get a masked qt5 USE flag for texmaker? It may be useful for testing. Created attachment 393146 [details]
texmaker-4.4.1.ebuild
This ebuild implements qt5 support and offers the user a choice between qt4 and qt5. It *should* work, but for some reason I don't understand I get sandbox violations.
You don't need two mutually exclusive USE flags to select Qt version. One is enough (e.g. qt5) and then you use "qt5?" and "!qt5?" for deps. It may make sense for transparency though? That way the user will know that USE="qt4" will pull in Qt4 and USE="qt5" will pull in Qt5. (In reply to Davide Pesavento from comment #4) > You don't need two mutually exclusive USE flags to select Qt version. One is > enough (e.g. qt5) and then you use "qt5?" and "!qt5?" for deps. I consider it part of best practices to make it clear whether it will build with qt4 or qt5. The ebuild does not build because:
* The specific snippet of code:
* cp "${FILESDIR}"/texmakerx_my.pri . || die;
I tried to just remove that line, but compile failed right in the beginning because of hunspell.hxx not being found. I don't know how to fix that.
(In reply to Malte E. from comment #7) > * cp "${FILESDIR}"/texmakerx_my.pri . || die; We need this to make it find system hunspell and qtsingleapplication. It should not be the cause of the sandbox violation. We need consistency throughout the tree though (I believed we discussed about this before). Also, the ^^ REQUIRED_USE constraint requires users to enable (or disable if they're globally enabled) either qt4 or qt5 on a per-package basis. This is very inconvenient IMO. There are lots of users that don't care whether qt4 or qt5 is used, as long as it is seamless for them. Sorry, my fault, I didn't copy texmakerx_my.pri to ${FILESDIR}.
It seems the texmaker install script is trying to remove old versions of texmaker. I still get sandbox violations with the old version uninstalled, but far less than before.
When a previous version is installed, the install phase finishes despite numerous sandbox violations. I can then manually call ebuild /var/lib/portage/local/app-office/texmaker/texmaker-4.4.1.ebuild qmerge and texmaker installs and seems to be working fine. *texmaker-4.4.1 (28 Jan 2015) 28 Jan 2015; Justin Lecher <jlec@gentoo.org> +texmaker-4.4.1.ebuild: Version BUmp, #461584 + 28 Jan 2015; Justin Lecher <jlec@gentoo.org> texmaker-4.4.1.ebuild: + Import changes by Ben de Groot + |
