[Kde-imaging] Problem Building from SVN

[Caulier Gilles]

Le Jeudi 9 Juin 2005 08:43, Angelo Naselli a écrit :
> > if you get a recently released extragear app, it
> > has a fairly recent admin directory. __KDE_HAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY, as you
> > mentioned, is defined in admin/acinclude.m4.in . But that doesn't
> > guarantee that KDE_EXPORT (in kdemacros.h) is defined.
>
> Rigth and that was why i was afraid it cannot be a definitely solution.
>
> > For eg, a user with kde 3.2 downloads kipi from svn. he will get a very
> > recent admin with __KDE_HAVE_GCC_VISIBILITY defined (if his compiler is
> > recent enough). he doesn't have kdemacros.h because it was added only in
> > kde 3.3.2. So for him KDE_EXPORT is undefined and it will break
> > compilation.
>
> A solution could be not to test only the -fvsibility(xxx) options with a
> simple function
> int some_function( void ) __attribute__ ((visibility("default")));
> but to test also if we have kdemacros.h. That should grant the right
> behaviour. The trade of between gcc and kde version.
>
> > > Can you give me the command to align to svn so I can try it to all my
> > > mandr[ake|iva] versions?
> >
> > not sure what you meant here
>
> http://extragear.kde.org/apps/kipi/
> Does not seem to have any reference to svn, how can i make what i did with
> cvs co kdeextragear-libs-1?
>
> > > Mandriva 10.2 has kde 3.3.2 with visibility support (Laurent Montel
> > > patched kde to be something like 3.3.X with X almost 90). So if you
> > > test it using kde version you can fail for some distros.
> >
> > imo this backport was incorrect. packager should not modify kde version,
> > as it makes life difficult for us who want to support multiple distros
> > with different kde versions. right now, its either work with mandriva and
> > break other distros or vice-versa.
>
> Agree moreover they could at least chenge the kde version. But I'm not
> a mandriva employee so I cannot know which is the mandriva businness.
> I'm afraid it's not only a mandriva issue though.
> So a better test in admin should be proposed.
>

Or another solution is to remove remove gcc visibility rules at this time !

Gilles