Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix

[Jon Schlueter]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Fred Wright <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 7 Jan 2017, Jon Schlueter wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Fred Wright <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > On Fri, 6 Jan 2017, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> >> On 01/04/2017 02:56 AM, Fred Wright wrote:
>> >> > I just did in the interests of expediency, but as yet there's no 
>> >> > evidence
>> >> > that anyone other than Bernd sees the problem that the extra 50 lines of
>> >> > code are trying to fix.
>> >>
>> >> ... right now it fails to build while including compiler.h.
>> >
>> > That's the known issue with the Qt build, which I've been ignoring since
>> > Jon said he was going to look into it.  It has nothing to do with
>> > CheckFunc.  What happens when you build with qt=no?
>>
>>
>> Looking closer at how the QT support was hacked in, I'm inclined to
>> either re-write
>> it and correctly extract the c++ isms that are scattered through the C
>> code, or drop the qt support all together if we don't have an active
>> developer to maintain it.
>
> Dropping it altogether seems overly heavy-handed.  If it's too broken to
> leave enabled, then I'd suggest downgrading it to "experimental" and
> making qt=no the default.  That way, anyone who wants to can still "use at
> own risk", but the default build isn't broken.  Though just making it
> build shouldn't be too hard.

Yea, I have a re-producer environment now for what Bernd was seeing,
I'll see if I can work any magic on it.

> My impression is that Rob would like to have it work, but that isn't the
> same as volunteering to maintain it. :-)
>
> Fred Wright
>