Bug 101775 – [Qt] MiniBrowser should not strongly depend on QtTestSupport.

• Status: RESOLVED
• Resolution: FIXED
• Component: New Bugs

[Zeno Albisser]

[Qt] MiniBrowser should not strongly depend on QtTestSupport.

[Zeno Albisser]

Created attachment 173331 [details]
Patch

[Early Warning System Bot]

Comment on attachment 173331 [details]
Patch

Attachment 173331 [details] did not pass qt-ews (qt):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/14792125

[Early Warning System Bot]

Comment on attachment 173331 [details]
Patch

Attachment 173331 [details] did not pass qt-wk2-ews (qt):
Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/14794032

[Andras Becsi]

Comment on attachment 173331 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=173331&action=review

> Source/WebCore/Target.pri:4079
> +if(build?(qttestsupport)) {

This should probably be have?(qttestsupport), which should fix the build.

[Zeno Albisser]

Comment on attachment 173331 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=173331&action=review

>> Source/WebCore/Target.pri:4079
>> +if(build?(qttestsupport)) {
> 
> This should probably be have?(qttestsupport), which should fix the build.

No, that is intentional. As it is translated from build to have in features.prf.

> Source/WebCore/platform/qt/QtTestSupport.h:27
> +#if HAVE(QTTESTSUPPORT)

But these one here is evil. I should have known better. :-)

[Zeno Albisser]

Created attachment 173336 [details]
Patch

[Tor Arne Vestbø]

Comment on attachment 173336 [details]
Patch

View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=173336&action=review

> Source/WebCore/Target.pri:4079
> +if(build?(qttestsupport)) {

you can simplify this to just build?(qttestsupport) {}

[Zeno Albisser]

Committed r134200: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/134200>