On 2021/04/06 14:06, Dimitri Karamazov wrote: > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 11:41:11AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2021/04/06 03:13, Anindya Mukherjee wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 10:26:49AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > > Ohhhh I see what it's doing. Yeuch. > > > > > > > > 'This is a "best effort" parser. If it errors out, we instead end up > > > > relying > > > > on the PyQtWebEngine version, which is the next best thing.' > > > > > > > > This suggests that the fallback is not working correctly. We aren't > > > > doing > > > > anything funny with the PyQtWebEngine version. > > > > > > For some reason the fallback reports Chromium version as 87.x instead of > > > 83.x which we have. Debug output (just below the logo): > > > http://ix.io/2V9a > > > > > > I haven't looked into this further to see exactly why PyQt reports the > > > wrong version. QtWebEngine is reported as 5.15.4 instead of 5.15.2. > > > > Seems that it is picking up the version number of PyQtWebEngine, not > > QtWebEngine. > > > > If the QtWebEngine version number isn't available from PyQtWebEngine then > > I suppose it could look for the highest-numbered library version instead and > > use that for the ELF parser..not ideal but at least that should stay working > > when QtWebEngine is updated. > > > This patch does the job of finding library with the highest version quite > well. > I've tested with the plurality of some base library versions.
Thanks, this seems like the least-worst option available, I've committed it.
