Re: [kde-solaris] Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
2012/4/22 Raphael Kubo da Costa : > Alex Fiestas writes: > >> So real question is, who is using libsolid-hal nowdays? > > At least the BSD people are; nobody came up with a BSD implementation of > the *kit/u* stuff from Linux, so we're still using Hal. The same applies to Solaris. hajma
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Monday 23 April 2012 11:18:14 todd rme wrote: > Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems, > but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable > it? It's kind of already the case, except that instead of a CMake flag, right now it's controlled by an env var. Regards. -- Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net KDAB - proud patron of KDE, http://www.kdab.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Monday 23 April 2012 11:22:15 Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: > Alex Fiestas writes: > > On Monday, April 23, 2012 11:18:14 AM todd rme wrote: > >> Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems, > >> but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable > >> it? > > > > Well I don't see why we need HAL on Linux, so unless you can give me some > > reason too keep it I will make it available only on BSD/Solaris but not on > > Linux. > > Why not build it depending on the presence of HAL in the system and > avoid hardcoding these options depending on the OS? Well we know for sure the presence of HAL only at runtime (we don't depend or even check for libhal). Regards. -- Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net KDAB - proud patron of KDE, http://www.kdab.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
Alex Fiestas writes: > On Monday, April 23, 2012 11:18:14 AM todd rme wrote: >> Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems, >> but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable >> it? > Well I don't see why we need HAL on Linux, so unless you can give me some > reason too keep it I will make it available only on BSD/Solaris but not on > Linux. Why not build it depending on the presence of HAL in the system and avoid hardcoding these options depending on the OS?
Re: Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Monday, April 23, 2012 11:18:14 AM todd rme wrote: > Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems, > but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable > it? Well I don't see why we need HAL on Linux, so unless you can give me some reason too keep it I will make it available only on BSD/Solaris but not on Linux.
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
> Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems,
> but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable
> it?
if (CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME MATCHES "BSD")
set(HAL_OPTION_DEFAULT TRUE)
else ()
set(HAL_OPTION DEFAULT FALSE)
endif ()
option(KDE4_USE_HAL "Enable Solid backend using HAL" ${HAL_OPTION_DEFAULT})
Eike
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 3:10 AM, Alex Fiestas wrote: > Hello everybody! > > I'm doing some bug triage on libsolid (as well of some bug fixing) and I'm > finding that most "nasty" bugs are fault of our HAL backend (or HAL itself). > > I tried to build HAL and failed on it (easy fix though) but that made me > realize that there is no point of me fixing HAL issues on Linux because nobody > will actually use my fixes since I will be fixing bugs using HAL-Linux not > HAL-bsd or HAL-XXX (where we have actual users of this backend). > > So real question is, who is using libsolid-hal nowdays? > > Once we know the answer to that question I will: > -Make HAL backend option only available on those platforms. > -Move libsolid-hal either to unmaintained or to a new maintainer. > > Even though I will be having more KDE time from now on, I don't see a reason > why I shuold maintain this backend, I know how it works (ervin does as well) > so if a new maintainer step up we can mentor and help him/her. > > If nobody replies in a few days I will go ahead and move libsolid-hal to > unmantained. > > Also, in the extreme case that nobody cares about it (no platforms interested > on HAL) I will remove the backend on frameworks branch and the backend will > not be ported to libsolid2. > > Cheers ! Is there a way to have it so HAL is enabled by default on BSD systems, but on Linux systems you need to manually use a cmake flag to enable it? Also, for 4.8.x, is it safe to not build HAL support on linux distros that don't use it? Is there any cost to having HAL support enabled if it isn't used? -Todd
Re: Re: [kde-freebsd] Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 6:34 AM, Alex Fiestas wrote: > I do remember! but I left thinking that it was not worth because freebsd > people were working on something new to replace hal, I guess I understood it > wrong :/ We should be... It's just a matter of manpower. > Well, you will have to triage each libsolid-hal bug (50) see if they are still > valid and if possible fix them. I think this will be good for kde-freebsd > since it will give you the chance to know what is broken in hal and fix it. OK, maybe I won't fix them all tomorrow... > It is offical then ! I will re-assign the bugs to you tomorrow :p Ouch. :) -- Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer http://people.FreeBSD.org/~avilla
Re: Re: [kde-freebsd] Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Sunday, April 22, 2012 04:40:30 AM Alberto Villa wrote: > I'm not sure that was an official investiture (it was late in the > night - at Randa, do you remember Alex?)... :) I do remember! but I left thinking that it was not worth because freebsd people were working on something new to replace hal, I guess I understood it wrong :/ > Anyway, what would maintaining mean? I can step in if it's not a big task. Well, you will have to triage each libsolid-hal bug (50) see if they are still valid and if possible fix them. I think this will be good for kde-freebsd since it will give you the chance to know what is broken in hal and fix it. > Of course, I'd prefer not to have to port it to libsolid2 myself. That > would be too much given my current - and future - schedule. ;) Well, if you are keeping it in good shape I will port it to libsolid2, we are not expecting that big change so won't be a huge task anyway. It is offical then ! I will re-assign the bugs to you tomorrow :p
Re: [kde-freebsd] Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: > Wasn't Alberto Villa made responsible for libsolid-hal some time ago? I'm not sure that was an official investiture (it was late in the night - at Randa, do you remember Alex?)... :) Anyway, what would maintaining mean? I can step in if it's not a big task. Of course, I'd prefer not to have to port it to libsolid2 myself. That would be too much given my current - and future - schedule. ;) -- Alberto Villa, FreeBSD committer http://people.FreeBSD.org/~avilla
Re: Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
Alex Fiestas writes: > So real question is, who is using libsolid-hal nowdays? At least the BSD people are; nobody came up with a BSD implementation of the *kit/u* stuff from Linux, so we're still using Hal. > Once we know the answer to that question I will: > -Make HAL backend option only available on those platforms. Considering Linux distributions don't even ship Hal these days, doesn't it make sense to just build it depending on whether it is present on the system where solid is being built? > -Move libsolid-hal either to unmaintained or to a new maintainer. Wasn't Alberto Villa made responsible for libsolid-hal some time ago?
Moving libsolid-hal to unmaintained?
Hello everybody! I'm doing some bug triage on libsolid (as well of some bug fixing) and I'm finding that most "nasty" bugs are fault of our HAL backend (or HAL itself). I tried to build HAL and failed on it (easy fix though) but that made me realize that there is no point of me fixing HAL issues on Linux because nobody will actually use my fixes since I will be fixing bugs using HAL-Linux not HAL-bsd or HAL-XXX (where we have actual users of this backend). So real question is, who is using libsolid-hal nowdays? Once we know the answer to that question I will: -Make HAL backend option only available on those platforms. -Move libsolid-hal either to unmaintained or to a new maintainer. Even though I will be having more KDE time from now on, I don't see a reason why I shuold maintain this backend, I know how it works (ervin does as well) so if a new maintainer step up we can mentor and help him/her. If nobody replies in a few days I will go ahead and move libsolid-hal to unmantained. Also, in the extreme case that nobody cares about it (no platforms interested on HAL) I will remove the backend on frameworks branch and the backend will not be ported to libsolid2. Cheers !
