Policy regarding QtWebKit and QtScript

[Adriaan de Groot]

On Wednesday 30 December 2015 01:34:46 Vadim Zhukov wrote:
> There is a little chance QtWebEngine will be ported on OpenBSD: if
> someone will come in and fix Chromium and QtWebEngine to bundle less,
> at least. I won't volunteer: handling a few hundreds of KDE ports +
> ports of Qt itself is already big enough task for me.
> 
> So, again, it was my seeing, both for today and tomorrow. Now I'm back
> to porting other KDE5 stuff. Thank you for reading!

Thank you, Vadim. I spent an hour or two on qtwebengine today. I got the 
feeling that the motto is "y0 dawg, i hear you like build systems so i put a 
buildsystyem in your buildsystem so you can buildsystem while you 
buildsystem". It is a frustrating experience.

I'm trying hard to not make this sound like whining, really.

 - Why am I building ninja when it's already packaged externally?
 - Why am I building yasm?
 - Same applies to most of the bundled stuff. A lot of the FreeBSD patches for 
Chromium itself are, indeed, unbundlings. But those need to be re-done for 
webengine, because who knows how the versions differ.
 - The qmake and gyp (horse pucky!) are strongly tied into linux/mac/boot2qt, 
so finding all the bits and pieces that need adjusting is tricky.
 - Example, I thought I had bunged freebsd-clang into the system properly, but 
gyp is still trying to discover the assembler version by calling gcc.
 - Example from qt3d (so external to this discussion), using a broken OffsetOf 
in a bundled third party library.

This sounds like a case where the unbundling OSsen -- OpenBSD, FreeBSD, 
probably some of the Linuxen -- can and should get together to help make more 
of Qt 5.6 a truly cross-platform development environment. (Randa?)

[ade]