Review Request 129742: Add option FORCE_ENABLE_HUNSPELL

[Andreas Sturmlechner]

> On Jan. 2, 2017, 10:53 p.m., Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > I don't think this makes any sense. I understand your pain, would i'd rather improve the search of hunspell than accept it's crap and you want people to override it.

It sure ain't pretty. But then I don't know why the hunspell search is done how it's done now. Is it just for lack of being able to set a minimum version?


- Andreas


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/129742/#review101749
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 1, 2017, 11:01 p.m., Andreas Sturmlechner wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/129742/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 1, 2017, 11:01 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks and Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsmark.
> 
> 
> Repository: sonnet
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> HUNSPELL is optional, but its cmake module depends on updates on each
> future hunspell release to be found. Each time that happens, the user
> build is potentially silently missing a feature, because up to now it
> can not be reliably enabled, only disabled.
> 
> This was the least disruptive solution I could come up with.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   CMakeLists.txt edac12f6cdc1fddc7f6b9df0baeb519a6c6502fb 
>   src/plugins/CMakeLists.txt 58b254c670e7e57202bbc9c889c86a48041a044e 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/129742/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andreas Sturmlechner
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20170102/c7ca6c6d/attachment.html>