dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7:4[icu] fails to build with ICU >=59. ICU auto-detection... () x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -c -march=native -O2 -fno-ident -frecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -std=gnu++98 -Wall -W -I/var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/mkspecs/linux-g++ -I/var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/config.tests/unix/icu -I/var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/config.tests/unix/icu -I. -o icu.o /var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/config.tests/unix/icu/icu.cpp In file included from /usr/include/unicode/utypes.h:38:0, from /var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/config.tests/unix/icu/icu.cpp:42: /usr/include/unicode/umachine.h:347:13: error: ‘char16_t’ does not name a type typedef char16_t UChar; ^~~~~~~~ In file included from /usr/include/unicode/utypes.h:39:0, from /var/tmp/portage/dev-qt/qtwebkit-4.8.7/work/qt-everywhere-opensource-src-4.8.7/config.tests/unix/icu/icu.cpp:42: /usr/include/unicode/uversion.h:167:55: error: ‘UChar’ does not name a type u_versionFromUString(UVersionInfo versionArray, const UChar *versionString); ^~~~~ ...
Created attachment 472772 [details] qtwebkit-4.8.7.log
This ebuild currently forcefully uses compilation in C++ 1998 mode due to qt4-build-multilib.eclass having: append-cxxflags -std=gnu++98 Switching to C++ >=2011 mode would avoid errors in src_configure() phase, but there are later errors in src_compile() phase. Majority of required work would be to make this ebuild build at all in C++ >=2011 mode and is not ICU-specific.
dev-qt/qtwebkit:4[icu] seems to have no reverse dependencies, so this flag could be masked for dev-qt/qtwebkit:4.
(In reply to Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis from comment #3) > dev-qt/qtwebkit:4[icu] seems to have no reverse dependencies, so this flag > could be masked for dev-qt/qtwebkit:4. It's now masked in the 17.0 profiles, which is where ICU 59 will be unmasked. So I consider this bug "done". Reopen if you disagree.