[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Compiling on KDE 3.3.1
From:       Nicolas Goutte <nicolasg () snafu ! de>
Date:       2005-01-21 15:35:35
Message-ID: 200501211635.35070.nicolasg () snafu ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 21 January 2005 16:26, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> On Friday 21 January 2005 15:02, Laurent Montel wrote:
> > On Friday 21 January 2005 14:48, David Faure wrote:
> > > On Friday 21 January 2005 14:23, Laurent Montel wrote:
> > > > On Friday 21 January 2005 13:25, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > > > > It seems that compiling KOffice CVS HEAD on KDE 3.3.1 is not
> > > > > possible anymore, at least without a trick.
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem seems to be the kdelibs/kdecore/kdemacros.h file which
> > > > > defines badly the visibility. The workaround seems to be to use the
> > > > > file for KDE 3.3.2 instead (just copy it over the installed file).
> > > >
> > > > oops :((((
> > > > Sorry I thought that minimal kde requires for koffice was kde 3.3.2
> > > >
> > > > :((((
> > >
> > > I fail to see where the rush was to add the EXPORT stuff already,
> > > but if anyone wants kde-3.3.x compatibility, please let's revert it for
> > > now instead of going the ugly kdepim route....
> >
> > Before I continue (as I think that kdemacros existed into kde 3.3.x), do
> > you want to keep compatibility with kde <= 3.3.1 ?
>
> Well, the rule for KOffice was always "last stable KDE". However we had
> kept KDE 3.2.x compatibility as far as I know but it does not matter here.
> What matters is if we want to continue supporting KDE 3.3 (assuming it does
> not work either) and KDE 3.3.1.

Well, lookings at the KDE_3_2_BRANCH version of kdemacros.h shows me that 
there too, it is the buggy version.

So indeed we have to decide to force KDE 3.3.2 for users or not. (Developers 
can still use the work-around.)

Or perhaps use -fvisibility only if KDE 3.3.2 is found. (I do not know if it 
is possible to do so.)

Have a nice day!

>
> As the work-around is very easy, personally I do not mind if any of the two
> solutions is chosen.
>
(...)

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]