summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/dev-qt/qtwebengine/qtwebengine-6.5.2-r1.ebuild
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2023-11-15dev-qt/qtwebengine: drop 6.5.2-r1Ionen Wolkens
Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-10-17dev-qt/qtwebengine: update py3.12 comment with bugrefsIonen Wolkens
Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-10-05dev-qt/qtwebengine: fix build with gcc13+muslIonen Wolkens
Primarily been testing musl on a llvm-musl profile, so overlooked this. Does not manifest as an issue if use any of gcc12, clang, or glibc. Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-22dev-qt/qtwebengine: use -g1 rather than -g (qt6)Ionen Wolkens
Turns out -g is still too much, or at least with gcc+bfd. Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/914475 Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-22dev-qt/qtwebengine: replace -g3+ for -g unless custom-cflags (qt6)Ionen Wolkens
On second thought let's do this, but keep a warning that mentions USE=custom-cflags given users may not be used to -g* getting replaced and then lacking the symbols they were expecting. Not going to keep disk space / memory usage updated for -g as estimates would likely be all over the place and consider that the warning is sufficient there. Not using a full replace-flags '-g*' -g to allow e.g. a package.env that adds -g0/-g1 at the end to still work while disregaring the warning without implementing extra logic. Note that have not retried -g to be sure it is fine, albeit pretty sure it was fine last time tried. Worst case could replace by -g1, or drop flags-respecting-patches and request debugging symbols to gn instead (selectively forces -g1 even if asked for more). Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/914475 Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-20dev-qt/qtwebengine: extend -g warning and increase visibilityIonen Wolkens
If this comes up more often an issue, may opt to transform -g* (other than -g0) for -g without USE=custom-cflags. Albeit do not overly want to give surprises, nor assume when something is going to work or not given the toolchain and other options. Note that this does not affect <qtwebengine-6.5.2-r1 nor qtwebengine:5 because they simply do not respect *FLAGS. Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/914475 Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-15dev-qt/qtwebengine: Stabilize 6.5.2-r1 amd64, #914113Sam James
Signed-off-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
2023-09-07dev-qt/qtwebengine: fix build with >=libcxx-17Ionen Wolkens
May(?) need a revbump given updating to libcxx-17 while built against <17 unpatched could give symbol issues, ...but let's spare having everyone rebuild, esp given by the time llvm:17 is released may have qtwebengine-6.5.3 in the tree to trigger a build. Thanks-to: Violet Purcell <vimproved@inventati.org> Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-05dev-qt/qtwebengine: remove qtbase[X] dep (qt6)Ionen Wolkens
While this currently still requires X11 dependencies, qtbase[X] itself should not be necessary. Sparing the revbump. Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-05dev-qt/*: replace = by ~ for dev-qt/*:6 depsIonen Wolkens
Less jarring a little bit shorter. Made sense in Qt5 given it used a ver_cut QT5_PV and could be used to ignore additional components, but with PV it does nothing useful. Plus we still want _rc and _betas to match (_p<date> are where issues start though, if ever needed we could reintroduce QT6_PV, but for now...). Should have done this in the previous style commit. Still keeping :6, do prefer these being everywhere for clarity with Qt slots (and qa-vdb!) even if essentially a no-op here. Plus, even if this does not happen with Qt, two slots having the same version can happen with revisions (e.g. current webkit-gtk). Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>
2023-09-05dev-qt/qtwebengine: refactor qt6 ebuild, various fixes incl. muslIonen Wolkens
Essentially a rewrite, so only have a not exhaustive summary of changes rather than split commits. Bugs addressed: * respect *FLAGS wrt bug #652172 (fwics should be no issues left) * hopefully fixed musl/libcxx (tested with llvm-musl) wrt bug #876520 (not planning to review Qt5's myself, so no changes on that end) IUSE changes: * enable alsa by default, finding that you have no audio options only after building is not great and alsa is cheap * enable widgets by default, needed by both falkon and qutebrowser * add custom-cflags, if going to use *FLAGS then should strip-flags like chromium's ebuild * add opengl, unfortunately littered in QT_CONFIG(opengl) and need qtbase[opengl=] to avoid ABI/automagic issues * add vulkan, has its own feature so should only need qtbase[vulkan?] * add qml similarly to other packages Misc: * support EXTRA_GN like qtwebengine:5 and chromium (Gentoo-specific) * build dir went from >9GB to ~6.3GB by dropping -g1 * drop estack+extglob, setting extglob is technically not needed for use in bash [[ ]] tests which is-flagq does * drop INCLUDEPATH, tried to sed qmake files but this is using cmake * respect NINJA env var to allow samu (NINJA_PATH was a no-op) * use get_NINJAOPTS for NINJAFLAGS and ignore environment (NINJAOPTS is the var to set for this, while NINJAFLAGS is a private qtwebengine var, ninja does not actually use this directly) * drop icu's bundling check for simplicity (and consistency with other system libraries), bug #630834 prompted adding this but does not seem so fragile anymore (plus iwdevtools would report lib misuse, albeit not headers) * switch to bundled re2 to be spared headaches (see github PR#32281) * optfeature on chrome-binary-plugins for widevine support * cleanup/reduce QT_FEATURE and old comments * fix designer automagic * various dependencies adjustments, wrt re2c that is only needed if we build ninja * do not redefine _FORTIFY_SOURCE (use gentoo's defaults), upstream actually switched to =3 in chromium-118 (albeit only for ChromeOS) and "hopefully" is fine for this older version (tests pass at least) Also moved patches to a tarball (like qt5). It is simple small patches mostly adjusting macros rather than add actual code, but was beginning to add up. Considered reducing RAM requirements a little bit (generally *seems* not so bad), but there is rather bad spikes and I do not think it can be considered safe unless we assume everyone is not using RAM for anything else. Plus usage will likely keep growing with versions. Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/652172 Bug: https://bugs.gentoo.org/876520 Signed-off-by: Ionen Wolkens <ionen@gentoo.org>