Qt4 will be removed from the tree in the not too distant future. Can we add qt5 support to graphviz? There is an upstream patch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/blfs/svn/graphviz-2.40.1-qt5-1.patch Reproducible: Always
How upstream is this patch exactly? I can't see it pending on their old GitHub page, neither on their new Gitlab location.
Hmm, indeed. It looks I was wrong, sorry. It seems to be downstream patch.
Upstream issue: https://gitlab.com/graphviz/graphviz/issues/1300
Builds and starts fine for me.
The bug has been referenced in the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=466764e2d192316be446ceb1a2b760c223fab7fc commit 466764e2d192316be446ceb1a2b760c223fab7fc Author: Andreas Sturmlechner <asturm@gentoo.org> AuthorDate: 2018-01-07 10:42:55 +0000 Commit: Andreas Sturmlechner <asturm@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2018-01-07 13:42:40 +0000 media-gfx/graphviz: Switch USE qt4 to qt5 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/638026 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.19, Repoman-2.3.6 media-gfx/graphviz/files/graphviz-2.40.1-qt5.patch | 127 ++++++++++ media-gfx/graphviz/graphviz-2.40.1-r1.ebuild | 278 +++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 405 insertions(+)}
#error Qt requires a C++11 compiler and yours does not seem to be that http://linux.overshoot.tv/media-gfx/graphviz Fixed with: # export CXXFLAGS=-std=c++11 # emerge -a1 media-gfx/graphviz
Don't link to your site. Attach your build.log here.
(In reply to augustin from comment #6) > #error Qt requires a C++11 compiler and yours does not seem to be that > http://linux.overshoot.tv/media-gfx/graphviz > Fixed with: > # export CXXFLAGS=-std=c++11 > # emerge -a1 media-gfx/graphviz I agree this seems to fix it. I added a line to src_prepare in my ebuild: use qt5 && append-cxxflags $(test-flags-CXX -std=c++11) which resolved my issue with compiling against qt5 with gcc 5.4
I confirm that I was using gcc 5.4. We are a bit late in upgrading to gcc 6 which does include C++11 by default. This is the key in triggering the bug. It's up to the maintainers to decide how to handle this: 1) require GCC 6; 2) use Gary's fix; 3) ignore. I don't think the requested build log would provide any additional, useful information.
Guys, this is how a proper bug looks like: bug 648764 This can be fixed, but also bear in mind that <GCC-6 are masked in 17.0 profile for a reason, and the news item mentioned upgrading to GCC-6 also for a good reason.
ebuilds <2.40.1-r1 have been removed from the tree.