#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-01
<lubot> <TronFortyTwo> Latest Ubuntu.components is 1.3
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-02
<lubot> * acheronuk prods lots of Qt tests
<lubot> <acheronuk> In fact, anything that has half a chance of passing
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-03
<lubot> <acheronuk> Qt 5.9.4 is all a candidate for migration, but stuck
<Tathagat2006> how to start learning to build web apps and desktop apps for linux using QT?
<lubot> <mitya57> @Tathagat2006, Wrong channel, please ask on #qt
<Tathagat2006> lubot: thanks
<lubot> * acheronuk pokes Qt
 * mitya57 says HUGE thanks to acheronuk
<tsimonq2> +1, it got tangled with apps...
<acheronuk> it's still stuck
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-04
<lubot> <acheronuk> can qtwebkit be built without gstreamer (temporarily)? with gstreamer broken in proposed qtwebkit depending on it is one blocker I think?
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @acheronuk, @mitya57
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-05
<mitya57> acheronuk, tsimonq2: Looks like there is an option for that: https://github.com/annulen/webkit/blob/qtwebkit-5.212/Source/cmake/OptionsQt.cmake#L241
<mitya57> Should be as easy as adding -DUSE_GSTREAMER=OFF to EXTRA_CMAKE_ARGUMENTS (in d/rules).
<acheronuk> hopefully gstreamer in -proposed will be sorted today so such measures won't be needed. it was just an idle thought and might not be wise
<acheronuk> mitya57: hmmm. when I tried I added -DGSTREAMER_DEFAULT=OFF, which did not work. which I guess it wouldn't
<lubot> <mitya57> @acheronuk, Yes, that probably wouldn't work. USE_GSTREAMER is better.
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-06
<lubot> <acheronuk> [21:30] <infinity> acheronuk: Qt looks migratey.
<lubot> [21:31] <infinity> migratory?
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-07
<lubot> <Lazy B> migraine :D
<lubot> <tsimonq2> :D
<santa_> migrateried
<lubot> Santa was added by: Santa
<lubot> <acheronuk> @Santa welcone :)
<lubot> <Santa> Thanks
<lubot> <tsimonq2> o/
<lubot> <Santa> \o
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-12
<lubot> <tsimonq2> I now have upload access to all of Qt in Ubuntu! \o/
<mamarley> Congratulations, and remember, with great power comes great responsibility.
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Thanks :)
<mitya57> tsimonq2: congratulations!
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, Thanks!
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-13
<lubot> OE9SBV was added by: OE9SBV
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Welcome @OE9SBV
<lubot> ilyaishere was added by: ilyaishere
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Hello! :)
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Not sure if this chat is the right place to ask, but I am facing problems when using Qt with OpenGL ES on Debian
<lubot> <ilyaishere> It's related to packaging, so Ubuntu is probably no different
<lubot> <ilyaishere> (Photo, 810x1020) https://i.imgur.com/FoZExRS.jpg
<lubot> <ilyaishere> I was launching Plasma Mobile on an x86 device, when I encountered this:
<lubot> <ilyaishere> https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/qt/qtbase/blob/master/debian/rules#L28
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Turns out OpenGL ES support is disabled in non-ARM platforms in packaging
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Do you think it is possible to enable it?
<wxl> you should as the debian maintainers
<lubot> <ilyaishere> But they disabled it
<wxl> but if your problem is with debian, then you need to discuss it with them
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Ok, I'll try to find a related discussion chat. What I wanted to ask if enabling it is possible in theory, from the packaging perspective
<wxl> well, everything's possible
<lubot> <ilyaishere> Cool
<lubot> <ilyaishere> I used Ubuntu initially, but had to move to Debian as x86 support is dropped here :c
<lubot> And building Qt manually is no fun...
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @ilyaishere What wxl doesn't note is that @mitya57 is here from Debian ð
<lubot> <tsimonq2> And what do you mean about dropping x86 support?
<lubot> <ilyaishere> @tsimonq2, Wow, cool! He actually authored this file
<lubot> <ilyaishere> @tsimonq2, If I remember correctly, x86 is no longer supported in new Ubuntu releases
<lubot> <acheronuk> "And building Qt manually is no fun..."  ð®
<lubot> <ilyaishere> @acheronuk, Is it?
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-14
<lubot> <mitya57> @ilyaishere, Yes, we build with only one OpenGL variant. It is GL ES on arm and desktop OpenGL on everything else.
<lubot> <mitya57> Do you say that your device is x86 but has GL ES? I never heard of such.
<lubot> <ilyaishere> @mitya57, Yeah, that's Intel's SoC
<lubot> <mitya57> So I'm afraid you have to build Qt itself. Or use some kind of online installer if you find one for your configuration.
<lubot> <mitya57> @ilyaishere, If you tell me your device model, then maybe we'll discuss this in Debian.
<lubot> <mitya57> @ilyaishere, That's just the default Ubuntu (GNOME). Kubuntu still provides i386 images.
<lubot> <ilyaishere> @mitya57, I have Intel Clovertrail+, in my case - in ASUS ZenFone 5
<lubot> <mitya57> @ilyaishere, Ok, thanks
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-15
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Mirv: Hi! Can I please be added to ~ubuntu-qt-packagers?
<Mirv> tsimonq2: done!
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @Mirv, Thanks!
 * acheronuk says welcome to queuwbot. lol
<acheronuk> or queuebot even
<lubot> <tsimonq2> :D
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-16
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @mitya57 I'm thinking it would be a good idea to do a mass rename of the ubuntu* branches to follow the scheme of e.g. ubuntu/bionic instead of ubuntu+1 so we know what release it is specifically for. Objections to doing this?
<lubot> Mirv, is there any historical reason for not doing this?
<Mirv> no particular historical reason. first there was a need for ubuntu branch, then there was a need to maintain both stable and next branches. the only reason might be not creating lots of branches over time.
<lubot> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, I don't mind, but it can cause minor troubles for people who already have the âubuntuâ branch locally. Git does not allow for both âfooâ and âfoo/barâ branches to be present.
<lubot> <mitya57> Also for most modules the historical branches wonât be needed much because (a) we rarely do SRUs for modules other than qtbase and (b) we are usually in sync with Debian, this cycle is an exception.
<lubot> <mitya57> So an alternative approach may be using the master âubuntuâ branch for the current development release and just pushing tags for SRUs if we do them.
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @Mirv, Ah OK.
<lubot> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, Can't we rename it to whatever release that's currently at then?
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Sure, migration for people who have it locally might be tedious.
<lubot> <tsimonq2> But who else has these branches cloned?
<mitya57> Ok, I donât mind, do whatever you prefer :)
<lubot> <tsimonq2> OK :)
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Qool
<Mirv> I tended to do the (rare) SRU:s with dget / debuild / debdiff rather than using git
<Mirv> after there was no longer a git branch following the specific release
<Mirv> but anything is fine
<lubot> <tsimonq2> Right, OK
<lubot> <tsimonq2> I mean, it makes sense if we want to put a few fixes in one SRU or if we want to deliver a point release post-final beta freeze.
<lubot> <tsimonq2> And that reminds me, I need to have a discussion with the security team regarding QtWebEngine
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-17
<tsimonq2> Mirv, mitya57: There, all of the changes have been made to the branches from our discussion.
<tsimonq2> So for now on, let's consider it policy to follow the ubuntu/$RELEASE naming scheme for things. :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, Ack!
<lubot2> <bashfulrobot> Hey @tsimonq2 which IRC channel is this room bridged with? I'm going to join that in my IRC client and remove it from my phone.
<Mirv> bashfulrobot: #ubuntu-qt (Freenode)
<bashfulrobot> Mirv: thanks for the heads up
<bashfulrobot> tsimonq2: can you remove me as an admin on the telegram group for this room? Otherwise I can't remove it without deleting it. Appreciated.
<lubot2> bashfulrobot was removed by: tsimonq2
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> There you are.
<bashfulrobot> tsimonq2: Thanks man!!
<tsimonq2> bashfulrobot: np :)
<tsimonq2> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtcreator/4.5.2-1ubuntu1
<tsimonq2> Just did the merge. :)
<tsimonq2> I also did a qtbase merge from Debian (merging in -11 and -12) the other day.
<lubot2> nggraham was removed by: nggraham
<tsimonq2> irt queuebot being in here, I'm hoping it can be used for tracking of qt queue items
<tsimonq2> Maybe I can figure out how to get Bileto to work with it...
<lubot2> Schyken was added by: Schyken
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Welcome!
<lubot2> <Schyken> @tsimonq2, I am here to be loved, and translate into English.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> ð
<tsimonq2> I wonder if it would be a good idea to create an ML or something (like, ihodge@example.net) so that there's something useful to put in the Maintainer field of Ubuntu-specific Qt packages.
<tsimonq2> We could also have bug reports for Qt-specific packages go there too.
<tsimonq2> mitya57, Mirv, acheronuk: Thoughts?
<lubot2> <acheronuk> sounds reasonable in theory, though not my call.
<tsimonq2> OK.
<tsimonq2> I'd like opinions from Timo and Dmitry (at minimum) before going ahead with it. :)
<tsimonq2> I mean, we could call this a "team" (Qt 5 Uploaders Team) but it's a loose one I think, especially with Timo and Dmitry both having core-dev. :)
<lubot2> Schyken was removed by: Schyken
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-18
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, Do we have any Ubuntu-specific Qt packages?
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, Well, we have things which I could sort of consider shared, so like the equivalent of "Qt Extras"
<lubot2> <mitya57> Sorry, I don't get it. If they are shared, then why introduce a delta and change the maintainer address?
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, My point is, if we have a delta (which is possible), it might be useful to point it there.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> But I guess I could refocus my main point to be collection of bugs that doesn't involve joining an LP team. :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> I don't see much point in doing this. Our delta is small, and we run update-maintainer anyway.
<lubot2> Also, the original maintainer field is âDebian/Kubuntu Qt/KDE maintainersâ and I think it's great that we have a common team and join our efforts.
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, We get our bugs on Launchpad anyway, what would change?
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, OK, fine by me. :)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, True.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, If I wanted to nitpick though, that should probably be "Debian/Ubuntu Qt/KDE Team" :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, I agree, this can be changed
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, Ok
<lubot2> <alleehol> Can this be backported to bionic? https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-54464
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @alleehol, It sure can.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> I'll do that today.
<lubot2> <alleehol> Great. thx
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> On another Qt-related note, I'll see if I can find an AA to process bug 1745741... We can finally remove pykde4 from Bionic.
<ubottu> bug 1745741 in pykde4 (Ubuntu Bionic) "RM: removed in Debian, working towards Qt 4 removal goal" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1745741
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @alleehol, Np :)
<tsimonq2> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtcreator/4.5.2-3ubuntu1
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, Great! Maybe also sync qbs?
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Oh, right. :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> 1.10.1 looks bugfix-only compared to 1.10.0
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qbs/1.10.1+dfsg-1
<lubot2> <mitya57> Thanks :)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> np :)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/qt/qtdatavisualization
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Since Feature Freeze doesn't apply to NEW packages, my plan is to fix bug 1727617 before Final Beta.
<ubottu> bug 1727617 in Ubuntu Bionic "[needs-packaging] libqt5datavisualization5" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1727617
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Same with https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/qt/qtnetworkauth although I know @acheronuk has packaging and there's some Neon packaging already there so it shouldn't be that hard.
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-19
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, I thought it does? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess#FeatureFreeze_for_new_packages
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, That differs to multiple conversations I've had recently with members of the Release Team. :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> Maybe the wiki needs updating then.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> I'll ask someone from the Release Team next time I talk to them. :)
<Mirv> tsimonq2: I thought ~all Ubuntu packages are supposed to have the ubuntu-devel-discuss as a Maintainer, since there are not dedicated maintainers as such in Ubuntu. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Ubuntu/ForDebianDevelopers#Package_maintenance
<Mirv> mitya57: Ubuntu still has the qtpim/qtsystems/qtfeedback snapshots
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @Mirv, In practice though I have found it varies.
<Mirv> might be, I don't know any other official word than what it says on that wiki page. as for bug reports, they are team subscribed but via LP, so maybe that's one reason for "not using" the Maintainer field for anything meaningful re: bug reports
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Hm, idk.
<lubot2> <mitya57> @Mirv, I have filed bug 1732970 to get rid of two of them
<ubottu> bug 1732970 in qtsystems-opensource-src (Ubuntu) "Remove cordova-ubuntu-3.4, qtfeedback-opensource-src, qtsystems-opensource-src from archive" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1732970
<lubot2> <mitya57> For qtpim, I would either get it removed too or included in Debian.
<Mirv> ok
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-20
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pykde4/+bug/1745741
<ubottu> Launchpad bug 1745741 in update-manager (Ubuntu Bionic) "RM: removed in Debian, working towards Qt 4 removal goal" [Medium,Fix released]
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> pyqt4 is now gone! \o/
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Er
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> pykde4
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Right :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, \o/
<bshah> tsimonq2: helo
<tsimonq2> Heyo
<tsimonq2> How you doing?
<bshah> I am doing fine.. I haz a debian question
<tsimonq2> Shoot. :)
<bshah> (qt related)
<bshah> why is qtvirtualkeyboard not available for armhf on buster? :>
<bshah> (I know I should ask this in debian IRC, but mmm.. too lazy to join another network)
<tsimonq2> It should be...
<tsimonq2> :/
<tsimonq2> It's there for Bionic. :D
<bshah> well yes.. ubuntu is not issue.. it's just buster..
<tsimonq2> Hmm.
<tsimonq2> It *should* be there.
<tsimonq2> @mitya57: ideas?
<lubot2> <mitya57> Its tests failed: https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=qtvirtualkeyboard-opensource-src
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Oh
<bshah> hm
<bshah> I see no tests failing?
<bshah> or I am blind?
<bshah> only fatal-ish error I see is : QStandardPaths: XDG_RUNTIME_DIR points to non-existing path '/run/user/2952', please create it with 0700 permissions.
<lubot2> <mitya57> One of the subprocesses died with âIllegal instructionâ
<bshah> ah
<bshah> hm
<lubot2> <mitya57> This may be related to https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-62066
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-21
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> So we can keep track of things in Ubuntu â bug 1757320
<ubottu> bug 1757320 in zbar (Ubuntu) "Remove Qt 4 from the archive" [Medium,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1757320
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, Looks impressive
<bshah> @mitya57: any chance the tests for armhf can be skipped in qtvirtualkeyboard debian? (while I agree that it is issue from qt side, it makes it harder for me to use qtvirtualkeyboard in Plasma Mobile :>)
<bshah> (I am working on debian based plasma mobile image)
<lubot2> <mitya57> @bshah> @mitya57: any chance the tests for armhf can be skipped in qtvirtualkeyboard debian? (while I agree that it is issue from qt side, it makes it harder for me to use qtvirtualkeyboard in Plasma Mobile :, Yes, I think we can disable them
<bshah> \o/
<lubot2> <mitya57> I will try to remember about this later today :)
<bshah> okay cool (and thanks)
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, Maybe you can also file a separate bug to track qtwebkit-source removal?
<lisandro> bshah, @mitya57: I just happened to ask the same to Mitya57 over into the Debian channel. The tests seems flaky, upstream is already blacklisting three of them
<lisandro> I'll upload to debian soon
<bshah> lisandro: okay cool
<lubot2> <mitya57> @lisandro, Sorry, I did not have a chance to read IRC today. Please disable the tests on architectures where they are failing.
<lubot2> <mitya57> And maybe add a reference to https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-62066, I am quite sure it's the same bug
<lisandro> Not on all archs
<lubot2> <mitya57> On other architectures maybe it's something from this list: https://salsa.debian.org/qt-kde-team/qt/qtwebsockets/blob/master/debian/rules#L40
<lisandro> nah, on qtvirtualkeyboard it's mostly flaky tests, they are even marked in test/foo/BLAKLIST by upstream
<lisandro> but I like how you solved that, I'll consider that for the next run
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, What's the purpose? :)
<lubot2> nanu_c was removed by: nanu_c
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, I figure that 19.04 gives plenty of time for packages that people care about
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-22
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> wgrant advised me to file separate bugs instead of one big bug (which makes sense, in hindsight...) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qt4-removal
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> I'll send an email to ubuntu-release shortly.
<lubot2> <Lazy B> Never heard anything about 5.11 being the last dot release. This link here tells something different http://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/02/22/qt-roadmap-2018/
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Oh?
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Maybe I misunderstood what "planning for Qt 6 after 5.11" meant.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> (In fact, I probably did.)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Sorry.
<lubot2> <Lazy B> I think we have at least 3 years before Qt6 will appear in some shape
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> I also said that in #kubuntu-devel, not here. :P
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> But yeah,
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Makes sense.
<lubot2> <mitya57> @tsimonq2, It would be nice to follow Debian and remove qtwebkit-source before the rest of Qt (because it is a very vulnerable piece of software).
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57, See above, there's a separate removal bug for that now. :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> Ok :)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Many thanks to slangasek who just removed a good chunk of obsolete Plasma widgets that were Qt 4 :)
<lubot2> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance&field.status%3Alist=FIXRELEASED&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.structural_subscriber=&field.component-empty-marker=1&field.tag=qt4-removal&field.tags_combinator=ANY&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.has_cve.used=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.affects_me.used=&field.has_no_package.u
<lubot2> sed=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_branches.used=&field.has_branches=on&field.has_no_branches.used=&field.has_no_branches=on&field.has_blueprints.used=&field.has_blueprints=on&field.has_no_blueprints.used=&field.has_no_blueprints=on&search=Search
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @mitya57 Here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtwebkit-source/+bug/1757846
<ubottu> Launchpad bug 1757846 in qtwebkit-source (Ubuntu) "Please port your package away from Qt 4" [Undecided,New]
<lubot2> <mitya57> Too bad that we don't have bug dependencies
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> You can merge bugs, I guess.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> (mark one bug as affecting a few other affected patches and mark the bugs filed against those patches as duplicates of the original)
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> s/patches/packages/g
<lubot2> <mitya57> Nah, I would better leave these as separate bugs and add links to Debian BTS for packages I'm interested in.
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Alright
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> I might as well go through and add links to the BTS for all of these
<lubot2> <mitya57> There is a list of Debian bugs at https://wiki.debian.org/Qt4Removal
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Right, I linked that wiki page in all the bug descriptions in Ubuntu :)
<lubot2> <mitya57> Oh :)
<lubot2> <acheronuk> why is qtvirtualkeyboaud not built with languages?  (CONFIG += lang-all)
<lubot2> <acheronuk> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758099
<ubottu> Launchpad bug 1758099 in plasma-workspace (Ubuntu) "sddm virtual keyboard's langage can't be changed" [Undecided,New]
<lubot2> <mitya57> Why is it not the default build configuration?
<lisandro> is it because the build expects all languages available at build time?
<lisandro> I've read something alongside that in a kde ml
<lisandro> if someone can confirm it *maybe* we can trick hunspell/myspell maintainers to provide a metapackage
<lisandro> https://doc.qt.io/qt-5.10/qtvirtualkeyboard-build.html might shed some light
<lisandro> we might need to pass lang-all
 * lisandro tries
<acheronuk> would be nice if its that simple!
<lisandro> it owuld
<lisandro> but I think it needs all those packages
<acheronuk> opensuse and arch build requires are just hunspell, so the actual input lang support may be internal?
<lisandro> does opensuse and arch ship each lang in a separate package?
<lisandro> the current build dependnecies need hunspell-en-gb
<lisandro> mitya57: by the way I am currently needing to add testing to sources.list in order to fullfil qt's needs on gtk
<lisandro> I do realy hope it's a bug somewhere else
<mitya57> Qt does not need gtk, only qt5-gtk-platformtheme depends on it but it is an optional package
<lisandro> if I get to re do a chroot for tetting I'll show you
<lisandro> *testing
<acheronuk> arch seem to split hunspell
<lisandro> do the use CONFIG+=all-langs ?
<lisandro> er, lang-all
<mitya57> yes: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/qt5-virtualkeyboard#n27
<mitya57> also handwriting, that may be useful for us too
<acheronuk> lisandro: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/qt5-virtualkeyboard
<lisandro> except we can't use handwriting
<acheronuk> # Only enable languages that don't force-include bundled 3rdparty libs
<acheronuk> %qmake5 "CONFIG+=lang-ar_AR lang-da_DK lang-de_DE lang-en_GB lang-es_ES lang-fa_FA lang-fi_FI lang-fr_FR lang-hi_IN lang-it_IT lang-nb_NO lang-pl_PL lang-pt_PT lang-ro_RO lang-ru_RU lang-sv_SE"
<acheronuk> that is opensuse ^^
<lisandro> let's try lang-all then
<lisandro> oh, not possible
<lisandro> I see what opensuse does
<lisandro> we are removing tcime and pinyin
<lisandro> from 3rdparty
<lisandro> but I think we better use a patch for that
<lubot2> <mitya57> Just for more statistics, Fedora also uses lang-all: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qt5-qtvirtualkeyboard/blob/master/f/qt5-qtvirtualkeyboard.spec#_52
<lisandro> but also builds the 3rdparty tcime and pinyin which e do not ship due to dfsg
<lisandro> *we do not
<acheronuk> lisandro: 'we' as in debian AND ubuntu?
<lisandro> yes, we both adhere to them
<lisandro> well, at least I think you also have that part removed
<lisandro> but feel free to check :-)
<acheronuk> must do, as my test build just crashed and burned on those :P
<lisandro> :-)
<lisandro> yup, will have a patch soon
<acheronuk> thanks :)
<lisandro> my pleasure! always good if we can improve stuff!
<lisandro> I might enable handwriting support too
<lisandro> acheronuk: patch already in salsa.d.o
<lisandro> + rules changes
<acheronuk> great
<lisandro> I might add arrow-key-navigation
<acheronuk> :D
<lisandro> acheronuk: everything on salsa.d.o now
<acheronuk> applying to 5.9.4
<acheronuk> and fails to build. test errors
<lisandro> yes, they are flacky
<lisandro> if you check debian/rules you will see that we are ignoring the errors
<lisandro> not the best thing to do, but....
<lisandro> also you need all the locales for all langs for the tests to pass
<acheronuk> ignoring with what?
<acheronuk> I see you ignoring on arm64?
<acheronuk> ah. I see what you did. just being blind
<acheronuk> lisandro: https://i.imgur.com/MxRbHkv.png
<lisandro> Excellent!!
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-23
* tsimonq2 changed the topic of #ubuntu-qt to: Ubuntu Qt Discussion Channel | https://pad.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-qt-transitions | Help remove Qt 4! https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qt4-removal | Currently: 5.9.4 in Bionic, 5.9.1 in Artful, 5.5.1 in Xenial, 5.2.1 in Trusty | This channel is bridged to Telegram at https://t.me/ubuntuqt | This channel is ihodge@example.net. Use of this channel implies acceptance of
<tsimonq2> Bah
* tsimonq2 changed the topic of #ubuntu-qt to: Ubuntu Qt Discussion Channel | https://pad.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-qt-transitions | Help remove Qt 4! https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qt4-removal | 5.9.4 in Bionic, 5.5.1 in Xenial, 5.2.1 in Trusty | This channel is bridged to Telegram at https://t.me/ubuntuqt | This channel is ihodge@example.net. Use of this channel implies acceptance of terms at https://wiki.ubunt
<tsimonq2> noo
* tsimonq2 changed the topic of #ubuntu-qt to: Ubuntu Qt Discussion Channel | https://pad.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-qt-transitions | Help remove Qt 4! https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qt4-removal | 5.9.4 in Bionic, 5.5.1 in Xenial, 5.2.1 in Trusty | This channel is bridged to Telegram at https://t.me/ubuntuqt | This channel is ihodge@example.net. Use of this channel implies acceptance of terms at https://is.gd/jF0j
<tsimonq2> I suck at changing topics, I really do. :P
<lubot2> lisandropm was added by: lisandropm
<lisandro> .
<lubot2> lisandropm was removed by: lisandropm
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-24
<pandaR> hello. i need to make the scroll bar of a qlist bigges so its easier to control with a touch screen. im using pyqt4. any idea?
<tsimonq2> I'd consider pyqt4 deprecated. ;)
<pandaR> well any idea how to do taht with pyqt5
<tsimonq2> I'd have to reference the docs.
<pandaR> if anyone intereste i made it
<pandaR> i make it work just added a line:   self.setStyleSheet("QScrollBar:vertical { width: 50px; }")  where self is the main qwidget
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-28
<tsimonq2> I just had a discussion with slangasek (vorlon) in #ubuntu-release earlier. He objects from a Release Team standpoint to me doing a Qt transition past when Final Freeze sets in, but it might be appropriate for an SRU.
<tsimonq2> Looking at the logs from the Qt Release Team meeting, it looks like we'll barely miss that deadline.
<tsimonq2> So what'll probably happen is preparation of 5.9.5 in Bileto and filing of SRU docs following that. We/I can then discuss with the SRU Team (and the Technical Board if necessary) if there are any concerns.
<tsimonq2> I do certainly believe that we should be able to ship 5.9 LTS updates throughout the cycle of the LTS, because from here on out, it's binary-compatible (therefore no ABI breaks) and iirc upstream is in "strict" mode so only fixes that would usually be eligible for an SRU will go in.
<tsimonq2> Of course, it'll require a manual review, but it shouldn't be horrible to do.
<tsimonq2> Once the initial review is done, if the SRU is approved, it should make further updates fairly painless.
<tsimonq2> Of course there's about a week before any of this is actionable, so if anybody has any thoughts on the matter, please do speak up. :)
<lisandro> tsimonq2: binary compatible for stuff not using private headers
<lisandro> yes, kde stuff might break
<lisandro> it has happened before
<tsimonq2> Hmm.
<lisandro> even in patch releases
<tsimonq2> OK.
<lisandro> but normally if qtbase and qtdeclarative don't break symbols you are mostly ok
<tsimonq2> Right. But I'm willing to bet we'll be fine. :)
<tsimonq2> I guess we'll have to see.
<lisandro> you will still need to rebuild packages using -private-abi, because you really want to bump it to keep coherence between submodules
<tsimonq2> But the amount of packages is likely trivial, yes?
<lisandro> for ubuntu, I don't know
<lisandro> for Debian: https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/qtbase-abi-5-10-0.html
<lisandro> and https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/qtdeclarative-abi-5-10-1.html which is motly the same thing
<tsimonq2> OK
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-29
<lubot2> Gertaa7oC was added by: Gertaa7oC
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @Gertaa7oC, Welcome!
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-30
<lubot2> Alvera4956B was added by: Alvera4956B
<lubot2> jenivievabubmasik was added by: jenivievabubmasik
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> Welcome!
<datajerkR4QLOA> .-.            .-.
<datajerkR4QLOA> /   \          /   \
<datajerkR4QLOA> |   _ \        / _   |
<datajerkR4QLOA> ;  | \ \      / / |  ;
<datajerkR4QLOA> \  \ \ \_.._/ / /  /
<datajerkR4QLOA> '. '.;'    ';,' .'
<datajerkR4QLOA> './ _    _ \.'
<datajerkR4QLOA> .'  a __ a  '.
<datajerkR4QLOA> '--./ _,   \/   ,_ \.--'
<datajerkR4QLOA> ----|   \   /\   /   |----
<datajerkR4QLOA> .--'\   '-'  '-'    /'--.
#ubuntu-qt 2018-03-31
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [s390x] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
<tsimonq2> Oh hey, it works. :)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [amd64] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [i386] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [armhf] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qtwayland-opensource-src [arm64] (bionic-proposed/universe) [5.9.4-0ubuntu2] (kubuntu, qt5)
<lubot2> Elnaa3gn0 was added by: Elnaa3gn0
<lubot2> IrazavStasova was added by: IrazavStasova
<lubot2> <Lazy B> @tsimonq2, Maybe they're bots? This group is public, so you know
<lubot2> <tsimonq2> @Lazy B, Dunno. :)
<lubot2> ÐÐ°ÑÐ¸Ð½Ð° ÐÐ²Ð°Ð½Ð¾Ð²Ð° was added by: ÐÐ°ÑÐ¸Ð½Ð° ÐÐ²Ð°Ð½Ð¾Ð²Ð°
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-05
<blaze[m]> I was testing qtcreator 4.11 built agaist llvm8 and 9, and it looks like syntax analysis doesn't work with llvm8 :\
<lubot> <X> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTCREATORBUG-23330
<lubot> <X> So Debian/Ubuntu distro version appears to be broken atm, fix comes only with the next patch release
<lubot> <X> Or do a rebuild against llvm 9 as a workaround
<lisandro> weird i did not notice it
<lisandro> 4.11.1 is Debian is still needing copyright review, that's why I did not upload it yet
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-08
<lubot> * mitya57 uploads GTK instead of working on Qt
<lubot> <mitya57> Well, actually I'm stuck on webengine copyright problems. Hopefully temporary.
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-09
<lubot> <RikMills> Qt4 removed from focal ð
<lubot> <bhushanshah> @RikMills [Qt4 removed from focal ð], Yay
<mitya57> Can someone update the IRC topic please? The versions are a bit outdated, and Qt 4 removal no longer needs help. I don't seem to have rights :-(
<mitya57> Something like: Ubuntu Qt Discussion Channel | https://is.gd/GIZG9E | 5.12.5 in Focal, 5.12.4 in Eoan, 5.12.2 in Disco, 5.9.5 in Bionic, 5.5.1 in Xenial | This channel is bridged to Telegram, ask us to be added | This channel is ihodge@example.net; use implies acceptance of the Ubuntu IRC channel terms.
<mitya57> tsimonq2: â
* RikMills changed the topic of #ubuntu-qt to: Ubuntu Qt Discussion Channel | https://is.gd/GIZG9E | 5.12.5 in Focal, 5.12.4 in Eoan, 5.12.2 in Disco, 5.9.5 in Bionic, 5.5.1 in Xenial | This channel is bridged to Telegram, ask us to be added | This channel is ihodge@example.net; use implies acceptance of the Ubuntu IRC channel terms.
<mitya57> Thanks :)
<lubot> <RikMills> np
<lubot> <RikMills> @RikMills [Qt4 removed from focal ð], and immediately I gets questions about amarok! â¦ I expect the Qt5 port of amarok will be finished just in time for the Qt6 switch ðð
<lubot> <mitya57> Haha
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-16
<lubot> <mitya57> Small status update on Qt version for Focal: â¦ - Most important parts of Qt 5.14.1 are now available in Debian experimental. I am working on the remaining parts â slowly because I have very limited time. â¦ - 5.14.2 is around the corner, so it doesn't make sense to push 5.14.1. Originally it was expected tomorrow, March 17th, but most
<lubot> probably it will be delayed a bit. â¦ - In case FFe is granted, we might try to push 5.14.2 to Focal. In case not, we should try to update to 5.12.8 which is expected before end of March. â¦ - In any case, I have limited time and this SARS-CoV-2 thing won't make it any better. If someone can help me (filing the FFe, preparing a PPA, doing rebuilds, e
<lubot> tc) it would be nice.
<lubot> <RikMills> I will help as much as I am able
<lubot> <mitya57> Thanks!
<lubot> <Santa> Surviving gracefully here
<lubot> <Santa> @mitya57 if you can make sure that all packages are in a git branch I can try to build it for ubuntu
<lubot> <Santa> @mitya57 additionally, if you point me to a PPA with packages you built I can copy them and rebuild all of kde frameworks/plasma/apps against it
<lubot> <mitya57> All packages are in salsa Git, experimental branch, Ubuntu has no delta compared to Debian.
<lubot> <mitya57> @Santa [@mitya57 additionally, if you point me to a PPA with packages you built I can co â¦], There is no PPA yet. I won't make it before I get 5.14.2 packaged in Debian.
<lubot> <mitya57> @mitya57 [All packages are in salsa Git, experimental branch, Ubuntu has no delta compared â¦], But you need to bootstrap docs in order to build it for Ubuntu, otherwise it will get dependency loop.
<lubot> <Santa> allright, that's cool. I will try to find some time to help. I am also buried with work, and the plague doesn't help. if hope you all and your families are ok
<lubot> <Santa> @mitya57 [But you need to bootstrap docs in order to build it for Ubuntu, otherwise it wil â¦], I know, I have been doing some experimental support for that in Kubuntu Automation
<lubot> <Santa> once it's mature I could show you how it works
<lubot> <mitya57> @Santa [allright, that's cool. I will try to find some time to help. I am also buried wi â¦], OK so far, but our country is in the beginning phase so far, I expect it to get worse soon.
<lubot> <mitya57> @Santa [I know, I have been doing some experimental support for that in Kubuntu Automati â¦], Great, I didn't know about that. Thanks.
<lubot> <Santa> oh speaking of which...
<lubot> <RikMills> Great, I was intending to build it for Focal anyway somewhere, at the very least for KCI if nothing else
<lubot> <Santa> @mitya57 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUwlzLZaZ5A
<lubot> <mitya57> I like that!
<lubot> <Santa> thank you very much :)
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-22
<lisandro> hope you are all doing well too
#ubuntu-qt 2020-03-31
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New source: qt5-ukui-platformtheme (focal-proposed/primary) [1.0.0-0ubuntu1]
<lubot> <X> No 5.14.2 release yet, but sources are available already
<lubot> <mitya57> Should we try to jump into the departing train and try to get 5.14.2 into Focal? â¦ @RikMills @tsimonq2 What do you think?
<lubot> <mitya57> Or better to ship 5.12.8 instead and do 5.14.2 when Focal+1 opens, with less rush?
<lubot> <RikMills> let me ponder. will be a while before simon is about USA time anyway
<lubot> <RikMills> gah. I think I am genuinely 50:50 split on this. @mitya57 in your opinion, which would be best/easiest to maintain?
<lubot> <mitya57> From maintenance point of view there is no much difference, but I'm afraid if we go with 5.14 now we will have too little time to test it, so it may be buggy at the point of release.
<lubot> <RikMills> I would really really really really like 5.14, BUT I also would hate having a buggy release ISO for several months to make Kubuntu look bad.
<lubot> <RikMills> So sad as that may be, perhaps that nudges me in the 5.12.8 direction
<lubot> <RikMills> @tsimonq2 ? when you are about
<lubot> <mitya57> I should also note that 5.12.8 is also not released yet, but there should be Qt release meeting in 3 hours.
<lubot> <RikMills> ack
<lubot> neothethird was removed by: neothethird
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: rejected qt5-ukui-platformtheme [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.0-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New source: qt5-ukui-platformtheme (focal-proposed/primary) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [source] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qt5-ukui-platformtheme [amd64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qt5-ukui-platformtheme [s390x] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qt5-ukui-platformtheme [ppc64el] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
<lubot> <mitya57> @mitya57 [I should also note that 5.12.8 is also not released yet, but there should be Qt â¦], [17:12] <jaheikki3> Target is to create release packages tomorrow â¦ [17:12] <jaheikki3> Then run RTA for those packages â¦ [17:12] <jaheikki3> And if all OK release Qt 5.12.8 later this week
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qt5-ukui-platformtheme [armhf] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New binary: qt5-ukui-platformtheme [arm64] (focal-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset)
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [amd64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [armhf] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [s390x] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [arm64] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]
-queuebot:#ubuntu-qt- New: accepted qt5-ukui-platformtheme [ppc64el] (focal-proposed) [1.0.1-0ubuntu1]

{'channel': 'ubuntu-qt', 'month': 3}