[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix
From: |
Fred Wright |
Subject: |
Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix |
Date: |
Sun, 8 Jan 2017 00:34:45 -0800 (PST) |
On Sat, 7 Jan 2017, Jon Schlueter wrote:
> 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.
By "what Bernd was seeing" do you mean the Qt build problem mentioned
above? I can reproduce it on at least one VM here, though not with the
native Mac build. Adding "std::" as Rob suggested indeed makes that
problem go away, and then exposes the one related to C vs. C++ for the
compiler.h include. I looked at that a bit, and my inclination would be
to move the compiler.h include to be before the conditional extern C
(i.e., in "head" rather than "tail"), rather than closing and reopening
the latter. This doesn't fix the more general "messy Qt C/C++" issues,
but may be enough to make it build, anyway. It also leaves open the issue
of whether mixing different "atomic strategies" between C and C++ is
appropriate.
Unless we can come up with a reasonable way to test the Qt code, it might
be a good idea to provide an "as is" notification in the docs.
None of this has anything to do with CheckFunc, of course, or even SCons
for that matter.
Fred Wright
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/01
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/03
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Gary E. Miller, 2017/01/03
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/03
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/06
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/06
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Jon Schlueter, 2017/01/07
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/07
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Jon Schlueter, 2017/01/07
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix,
Fred Wright <=
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/08
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Jon Schlueter, 2017/01/08
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/22
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/22
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/22
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/23
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/24
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/25
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Bernd Zeimetz, 2017/01/27
- Re: [gpsd-dev] Bernd's CheckFunc Fix, Fred Wright, 2017/01/29