El viernes, 27 de julio de 2018 10:33:48 -03 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz escribió: > On 07/27/2018 02:22 PM, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote: > > Don't get me wrong: I also don't like build depending on LLVM [1], but it > > became a hard dependency. Again, I haven't looked at the code yet (I'm > > over > > the transition now), so I'm purely guiding myself from what one of my co > > maintainers did (and he happens to be in vac). > > > > But what can we do if it became a hard dependency? > > I'm 99% sure it's not a hard dependency. It's a documentation utility. Which is then used by many packages, please check the other mail I have just sent. [snip] > > If for some reason a package build it's doc on an arch-specific build it > > will FTBFS. > > Then this package is clearly buggy. Documentation is arch-independent and > should never be built per architecture. You have a point here. > > But on a second thought you might want to tackle those packages yourself. > > If you like that idea well, we need a patch to disable qdoc compilation > > probably. > You don't need to disable QDoc completely. Just use it in a reasonable > way. > > >>> The only way around I see is submitting patches upstream to avoid clanf > >>> usage. Remember they need to go directly to upstream, we can't forward > >>> then > >>> except for very small changes. > >> > >> Strange policy. Lots of people here take patches from the bugtracker and > >> forward them upstream. In fact, that's what the official Debian > >> documentation says. > > > > Yes, but upstream has a CLA in which you don't give copyright permissions > > *but* allow the Qt Company to use the submitted code in their proprietary > > version, your code remaining FLOSS for every other aspect. > > *sigh* CLAs suck Yes, they do. > > The way they enforce that is by making the real coders push their work to > > their gerrit instance, for which you previously have to agree to the CLA. > > Yes. I know the deal. > > >> Either way, there are plans to make LLVM available on more targets, there > >> are already branches working on alpha, m68k, riscv64 and more. Until > >> then, > >> it would be nice if Qt wouldn't have a hard dependency on it solely to > >> build documentation. > > > > Again: I would *love* to. But to the best of my knowledge now, we can't. > > Of > > course, I'll be delighted to learn I'm wrong :-) > > I will take care of that - like always :P. I like that :-) > Adrian Mm, just noticed you sign as Adrian and not as John, will try to remember that. -- Los comentarios o respuestas sobre SL en tono absolutista solo hacen aparecer a la comunidad SL como una sarta de fanáticos que viven dentro de un tupperware. Pablo Di Noto - GrULiC Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer http://perezmeyer.com.ar/ http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.