----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125725/#review87135 -----------------------------------------------------------
src/kbuildsycoca/kbuildsycoca_main.cpp (line 121) <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125725/#comment59874> Maybe it would make sense to handle it using signal() directly here, rather than just ifdef'ing KCrash? - Aleix Pol Gonzalez On Oct. 20, 2015, 3:41 p.m., Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125725/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Oct. 20, 2015, 3:41 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks and David Faure. > > > Repository: kservice > > > Description > ------- > > kservice depends on KCrash only for kbuildsycoca. > make this optional and link only against it, if around. Move check to > kbuildsyscoca file. > > > Diffs > ----- > > CMakeLists.txt 4c0f269 > src/kbuildsycoca/CMakeLists.txt 19bdc84 > src/kbuildsycoca/kbuildsycoca_main.cpp 03619cc > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/125725/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Seems to compile fine without it. > > > Thanks, > > Christoph Cullmann > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
