Rietveld Code Review Tool
Help | Bug tracker | Discussion group | Source code | Sign in
(841)

Issue 568820043: Add glib-2.0 and gobject-2.0 library dependency

Can't Edit
Can't Publish+Mail
Start Review
Created:
4 years, 9 months ago by lilypond-pkx
Modified:
4 years, 9 months ago
Reviewers:
lemzwerg, knupero, pkx166h
CC:
lilypond-devel_gnu.org
Visibility:
Public.

Description

Add glib-2.0 and gobject-2.0 library dependency For a long time we relied on pango/pangoft2 to pull in the glib and gobject libraries. That worked as long as every distribution used a pangoft2.pc file that included both libs in the 'Required:' line. According to the pkg-config documentation that was definitely wrong, and the problem was corrected on opensuse tumbleweed recently. As a consequence building lilypond failed with a linker error as we use symbols from both libs directly in our c++ source code. Signed-off-by: Knut Petersen <knut_petersen@t-online.de>

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 2

Patch Set 2 : Fixed over-long lines #

Total comments: 12

Patch Set 3 : With Knut's comments - thank you. #

Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+49 lines, -3 lines) Patch
M aclocal.m4 View 1 chunk +38 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download
M config.make.in View 1 2 2 chunks +9 lines, -3 lines 0 comments Download
M configure.ac View 1 2 1 chunk +2 lines, -0 lines 0 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 8
lemzwerg
LGTM, thanks! https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/550830043/config.make.in File config.make.in (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/550830043/config.make.in#newcode34 config.make.in:34: CONFIG_LIBS = @LIBS@ @EXTRA_LIBS@ $(GLIB_LIBS) $(GUILE_LIBS) $(PANGO_FT2_LIBS) ...
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-16 19:38:50 UTC) #1
lilypond-pkx
https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/550830043/config.make.in File config.make.in (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/550830043/config.make.in#newcode34 config.make.in:34: CONFIG_LIBS = @LIBS@ @EXTRA_LIBS@ $(GLIB_LIBS) $(GUILE_LIBS) $(PANGO_FT2_LIBS) $(FONTCONFIG_LIBS) $(FREETYPE2_LIBS) ...
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-16 19:46:38 UTC) #2
lilypond-pkx
Fixed over-long lines
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-16 19:47:15 UTC) #3
knupero
See individual comments ... https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/582790043/config.make.in File config.make.in (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/582790043/config.make.in#newcode23 config.make.in:23: CONFIG_CFLAGS = @CFLAGS@ $(GLIB_CFLAGS) $(GUILE_CFLAGS) ...
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-17 07:59:41 UTC) #4
lilypond-pkx
With Knut's comments - thank you.
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-17 08:21:06 UTC) #5
lilypond-pkx
https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/582790043/config.make.in File config.make.in (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/568820043/diff/582790043/config.make.in#newcode23 config.make.in:23: CONFIG_CFLAGS = @CFLAGS@ $(GLIB_CFLAGS) $(GUILE_CFLAGS) On 2019/06/17 07:59:41, knupero ...
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-17 08:21:16 UTC) #6
knupero
Hi James! > Although it didn't break the patch test - which would have done ...
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-17 09:11:47 UTC) #7
pkx166h_runbox.com
4 years, 9 months ago (2019-06-17 12:52:22 UTC) #8
Hello Knut

On 17/06/2019 10:10, Knut Petersen wrote:
> Hi James!
>> Although it didn't break the patch test - which would have done a new
>> 'make' after it had been applied (after a make test-baseline had been
>> done). So I am guessing that the normal Patch Test Workflow does not
>> work for these files?
> If the problem did not show up in the patch test, then there is a
> problem with that patch test workflow, yes.

I am not a developer as you probably know - I'm a glorified admin person 
who can run a set of pre-defined steps/commands and interpret logs as 
required. I suppose the problem with 'ac' files being patched is that 
once you have built LP and run the test-baseline, you cannot re-run the 
autoconf set up/configure check without first having to clean your 
previous build which would then mean deleting your 'test-baseline' that 
you have just created.

I know that patching aclocal and related files is unlikely to affect the 
reg tests but  I am not sure if that is the case in every situation (not 
being a developer).

Anyway, I simply made sure that you patch changes could build, LP, the 
doc and make it's own test-baseline (which would at least exercise the 
code in terms of generating output, even if there is nothing to compare 
them to).

Thanks for all you do for LP.

James

Sign in to reply to this message.

Powered by Google App Engine
RSS Feeds Recent Issues | This issue
This is Rietveld f62528b