On Monday 27 January 2014 17:41:26 Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote: [snip] > > - It uses linux-g++ instead of linux-g++-64. While that could be the best > > fit, it would be good to know why. > > Maybe it is because linux-g++ may use '-m64' argument for GCC which > AArch64 does not support so build fails. Cool, thanks :) [snip] > If you need that for something: > > Author: Marcin Juszkiewicz <marcin@juszkiewicz.com.pl> based on > gtkwebkit changes by Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@linaro.org> > > License: same as upstream one Excellent! > > aarch64_fix_atomic_set.patch: > > - Copyright present. > > - Possibly needs the above patch applied. > > It requires aarch64.patch as it just change two lines. Yes, sadly we don't have the copyright for that yet :-( > > = Some extra remarks > > > > We need at least the proper copyright and license for the patches. In that > > way I'm able to apply them in the package and ping upstream wrt them. > > > > Of course, if the original author can push it to upstream's gerrit the > > better, because in case some objection arises I don't need to be in the > > middle as a (possibly noisy) proxy. > > Qt4 patches are not accepted upstream. All new code has to go to Qt5 and > since 5.2.0 QAtomics stuff is using std::atomic so compiler takes care > of it and there is no code for separate architectures. > > And all required patches were submitted - just one change to qtwebkit is > stuck in review. > > https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-35442 is upstream bug. Correct. So what we are currently missing should be: - The copyright and license of the qatomic stuff. - Fix the code that FTBFS without -fpermissive. Thanks for your input! Kinds regards, Lisandro. -- Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.