qt5-base: misleading list of system packages required #16280
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
qt5-base requires many more packages present than just a mere libxkbcommon-x11-dev currently suggested. Let's instead point users to thezure provision script, which a complete and an up-to-date list of them.
wrobelda
changed the title
JackBoosY
suggested changes
Feb 19, 2021
JackBoosY
added
the
category:port-bug
JackBoosY
suggested changes
Feb 19, 2021
JackBoosY
approved these changes
Mar 2, 2021
|
@wrobelda or @JackBoosY, could you merge with master? |
JackBoosY
reviewed
Apr 20, 2021
JackBoosY
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2021
JackBoosY
reviewed
Apr 21, 2021
|
Thanks for your contribution! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
qt5-base requires many more packages present than just a mere libxkbcommon-x11-dev currently suggested. Let's instead point users to the azure provision script, which has a complete and an up-to-date list of them.
Alternatively, a complete list of those packages could be added to the port file itself, but I find this approach cleaner.
This also signals that some more robust way of declaring a list of system-level dependencies for each port is needed.
Describe the pull request
A misleadingly short list of system-level dependencies required.