<div dir="ltr">Hi there<div><br></div><div>There are still conflicts with the localization files, for example:</div><div><br></div><div> pkg-static: nb-kde5-l10n-16.12.0 conflicts with kf5-ki18n-5.29.0 (installs files into the same place). Problematic file:</div><div> /usr/local/share/locale/nb/LC_SCRIPTS/ki18n5/ki18n5.js<br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I think the one between kdelibs4support and kio is also not yet fixed:</div><div><br></div><div><span style="font-family:monospace"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0)">pkg-static: kf5-kdelibs4support-5.29.0 conflicts with kf5-kio-5.29.0 (installs files into the same place). Problematic file: /usr/local/share/doc/HTML/ca/kcontrol5/cache/index.cache.bz2</span><br>
<br></span></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>mfg Tobias</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 10 December 2016 at 09:52, Martin Graesslin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mgraesslin@kde.org" target="_blank">mgraesslin@kde.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Thursday, December 8, 2016 9:32:13 AM CET David Faure wrote:<br>
> On mercredi 7 décembre 2016 21:06:11 CET Kevin Funk wrote:<br>
> > On Wednesday, 7 December 2016 20:10:40 CET Albert Astals Cid wrote:<br>
> > > El dimecres, 7 de desembre de 2016, a les 10:08:18 CET, David Faure va<br>
> > ><br>
> > > escriure:<br>
> > > > On lundi 5 décembre 2016 18:40:46 CET Martin Gräßlin wrote:<br>
> > > > > Am 2016-12-05 09:20, schrieb David Faure:<br>
> > > > > > On dimanche 4 décembre 2016 23:42:44 CET šumski wrote:<br>
> > > > > >> On nedjelja, 4. prosinca 2016. 00:37:52 CET David Faure wrote:<br>
> > > > > >> > Dear packagers,<br>
> > > > > >> ><br>
> > > > > >> > KDE Frameworks 5.29.0 has been uploaded to the usual place.<br>
> > > > > >> ><br>
> > > > > >> > New framework: prison<br>
> > > > > >> ><br>
> > > > > >> > Public release next Saturday.<br>
> > > > > >> ><br>
> > > > > >> > Thanks for the packaging work!<br>
> > > > > >><br>
> > > > > >> kconfig (r129382) breaks compilation of kdevplatform:<br>
> > > > > >> <a href="http://paste.opensuse.org/82016854" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://paste.opensuse.org/<wbr>82016854</a><br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > Indeed (but it's not the change from RR 129382, it's commit<br>
> > > > > > cd4e650<br>
> > > > > > from<br>
> > > > > > <a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/D3386" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://phabricator.kde.org/<wbr>D3386</a><br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > Seems to come from Inherits=BaseClass while BaseClass doesn't use<br>
> > > > > > arg="true".<br>
> > > > > ><br>
> > > > > > Here's a testcase for the kconfig unittests. Martin, can you take<br>
> > > > > > a<br>
> > > > > > look?<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > The earliest I can have a look is probably on Friday, I'm sorry.<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > My suggestion is to revert my two commits and I'll redo for next<br>
> > > > > frameworks.<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > OK, done. New git tag and tarball:<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > kconfig v5.29.0-rc2<br>
> > > > 47f7e954a58ba5538d055e2f75e483<wbr>cade48ee8a<br>
> > > > d6c12e0908de1b91529de15e75a52c<wbr>9974685c91b423d5b5abeb06f261d0<wbr>fa47<br>
> > > > sources/kconfig-5.29.0.tar.xz<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Acoording to kfunk the thing that broke kdevplatform wasn't really<br>
> > > kconfigs<br>
> > > fault but a side effect of kdevplatform code not being very good.<br>
> ><br>
> > Heya,<br>
> ><br>
> > the patch restoring the kdevplatform build with KF5 5.29:<br>
> > <a href="https://cgit.kde.org/kdevplatform.git/commit/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://cgit.kde.org/<wbr>kdevplatform.git/commit/</a>?<br>
> ><br>
> > id=<wbr>e84645d1694bdad7f179cd41babce7<wbr>23fe07aa63<br>
> ><br>
> > The code in kdevplatform is a bit special, it's probably the only place in<br>
> > whole KDE which broke due to the recent changes in kconfig. I don't see an<br>
> > easy migration path, even if you introduce said change in a later kconfig<br>
> > release.<br>
> ><br>
> > I don't mind if you leave kconfig as-is. But that's probably something for<br>
> > dfaure to decide.<br>
><br>
> Well, the change to kdevplatform isn't released yet, so kconfig 5.29-rc1<br>
> would break compilation of the current kdevplatform releases.<br>
><br>
> Also, the fact that I'm able to write a kconfig unittest that doesn't<br>
> compile tells me that something isn't right with these kconfig changes ---<br>
> unless it can be proven that what I'm doing in that new test is not<br>
> meaningful and is (now) forbidden, in which case it should at least be<br>
> documented. This is certainly worth another month of careful thinking<br>
> rather than rushing this into 5.29 now that it proved to be not 100%<br>
> perfect.<br>
<br>
</div></div>I investigated and can prove now that the test is not meaningful: it doesn't<br>
compile on master either. See <a href="https://paste.kde.org/po6oahg5p" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://paste.kde.org/<wbr>po6oahg5p</a><br>
<br>
The problem is the "Inherits" - it doesn't really specify the conditions. All<br>
we have in the documentation is "Class the generated class inherits from. This<br>
class must inherit KConfigSkeleton."<br>
<br>
But inheriting from KConfigSkeleton is not enough as the test case and the<br>
kdevelop example shows. It must have the same ctors as KConfigSkeleton<br>
available for the inheriting class. That's the problem with the autotest and<br>
the problem with kdevelop's case. There the ctor existed, but was private<br>
instead of public.<br>
<br>
Given that I think my change can go in, but we also should specify more<br>
clearly the Inherits requirements.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">Martin</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>