QSP patch/activator (Review Request 126125: [OS X] make KDE's trash use the OS X trash)

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Saturday November 21 2015 12:59:40 David Faure wrote:

>I still don't see why you can't just patch Qt on macports (given that you're already patching it anyway) rather than having to add something to each and every link line in KF5,

That would mean having 2 different Qt5 installs in MacPorts; one for pure Qt applications that are expected to behave "natively", and one for KF5 apps and the occasional pure Qt5 app that should behave in compliance of XDG because it's supposed to interact with KDE4 and non-Qt applications from the Freedesktop universe.
That's a solution I never really considered, and which I think would never make it into MacPorts.

It's already bad enough in that area: after months of silence while I prepared the Qt4 and Qt5 ports to enable concurrent installation the official (but not exclusive) maintainers of those ports both woke up and decided to do things their way. And of course by then they felt it was too much work to go over each and every change I made, and apparently unthinkable even to simply test my implementation. So now there's the official "qt4-mac" port, I have my own with a different install layout (I haven't bothered submitting that one), there's the official "qt5" port and my submitted "qt5-kde" port which has the XDG patch and an install layout that like the one from the old exclusive ports and what's usual under Linux (i.e. stuff in ${prefix}/share, ${prefix}/include/qt5 etc. rather than the whole bunch hidden under ${prefix}/libexec/qt5).

I probably don't need to modify each and every link line in each and every KF5 cmake file, despite the fact that there is no single "Tier 0" framework. Theoretically it ought to be enough to add the activator only to the Tier1 frameworks, though that would probably increase the likelihood that QSP gets called before it's toggled. I've also noticed that CMake apparently pulls in certain link dependencies recursively; I've seen the activator dylib appear in the link list of objects where I left it out explicitly (plugins, for instance).

>but let's have that discussion separately on k-f-d.

You got it :)

R.