[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#897667: qt4-x11: Please add support for new architecture "riscv64"



¡Hola Manuel!

El jueves, 3 de mayo de 2018 22:07:25 -03 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo 
escribió:
> Source: qt4-x11
> Version: 4:4.8.7+dfsg-15
> Severity: normal
> Tags: patch upstream
> User: debian-riscv@lists.debian.org
> Usertags: riscv64
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We need support in this package to bootstrap the riscv64 architecture.
> 
> Yes, I know that you want to get rid of Qt4 once and for all and ASAP, and I
> fully agree with the goal.  However, a bazillion of packages depend on
> qt4-x11 indirectly,

A little less than 300 source packages.

> for example libsdl2 needs it (through fcitx, then
> cmake-extra-modules, then qt5-qmake, then qtchooser that depends on Qt4
> stuff); many package still need it directly; etc.

fcitx: yes. The rest: they do not need Qt4. But the sole fact that you mention 
it means we better take a look here. Please give us more info with respect how 
this is happening (or something I can dig into).

> So without support in this package, progress becomes impossible at an early
> stage.

Let's try to see exactly what's happening here, the list you wrote here look 
really suspicious to me.
 
> I am attaching a patch that adds support for the architecture.  AFAIK
> (please confirm) upstream doesn't accept patches since long ago, so no
> point in sending it there.

Yes, Qt4 is **dead** upstream. Adding whatever support means becoming it's 
maintainer. And adding more probable life to something that should be not be 
here already.

> For Qt5 we're already sending it upstream, e.g.
> webkit stuff.

*Thanks* a lot for that. If you need help prodding upstream please be sure to 
contact us.

> It would be great if you could include these changes and release a new
> version for unstable, for the time being the patched version lives in
> "unreleased".

I must admit that the patch looks good. But before accepting it I really want 
to dig into the dependency chain you wrote above. This seems like a great 
opportunity to find possibly wrong stuff.

By the way: in http://deb.li/qt5builds I noticed that most qt5 submodules have 
been built but not qtbase! How did you achieve that?

Cheers, and thanks for trying to bootstrap riscv64!

-- 
http://xkcd.com/162/

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: