Policy regarding QtWebKit and QtScript

[Allan Sandfeld Jensen]

On Friday 25 December 2015, Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> On Friday 25 December 2015 12:42:26 you wrote:
> > On Donnerstag, 24. Dezember 2015 12:14:06 CET Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 22 December 2015 16:07:06 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez
> > > Meyer
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > The idea that users may have remainders of QtWebKit 5.5 on their
> > > > > disk (or
> > > > > not and thus unresolvable linkage) and install Qt 5.6 and still
> > > > > have (not
> > > > > recompiled) client code that is now gonna crash scares me a bit -
> > > > > it doesn't really improve reputation. Distros will virtually
> > > > > *have* to provide
> > > > > downstream webkit solutions to cover 3rd party installs and we'll
> > > > > get "somthing broke" reports on this all over the place.
> > > > 
> > > > What we distro packagers are going to do is to recompile QtWebkit for
> > > > as long  ans possible/necessary.
> > > 
> > > If I recall correctly, the FreeBSD guys say that QtWebEngine (is that
> > > what the new thing is called) is an absolute terror to get building in
> > > FreeBSD. There are apparently source-compatibility issues and it takes
> > > a great big stonkin' machine to compile it at all.
> > 
> > Sorry, but how is "it takes long to compile" and argument for or against
> > a piece of software if there is no feature equivalent alternative that
> > takes less time to compile?
> 
> Please don't focus on *one* single part of what I explicitly indicated was
> at- that-time-hearsay. Since then I've actually tried to compile Qt 5.6
> beta.
> 
> > Qt WebEngine is far easier to compile than Qt WebKit in my experience,
> > and it certainly doesn't take significantly longer. And of course the
> > former is far superior than the latter.
> 
> This bit makes it harder:
> 
> ./tools/qmake/mkspecs/features/functions.prf:    skipBuild("Qt WebEngine
> can currently only be built for Linux (GCC/clang), Windows (MSVC 2013 or
> 2015), OS X (10.9/XCode 5.1+) or Qt for Device Creation.")
> 
> So from the FreeBSD packagers' side, it *is* a big deal, because they not
> only have to get KDE software to work (which has traditionally been very
> cross- platform, and is easy to work with), and Qt to work (which has
> traditionally been very cross-platform, and is generally easy to work
> with), but also deal with 975MB of Chromium. That is, as they say, quite a
> lump of coal in the stocking.
> 
Does Chromium build on FreeBSD already? In know in QtWebEngine we have several 
qmake conditions that would need to be changed from linux to posix:!mac, but I 
haven't tried because I wasn't sure if FreeBSD was even support by Chromium.

`Allan