It should have a property to set the background color to transparent or another color (although the webkit default of white is fine) Moved from Qt tracker where it was http://bugreports.qt.nokia.com/browse/QTBUG-11591
Any progress with that bug?
Created attachment 84117 [details] Proposed patch to implement the feature.
Created attachment 84118 [details] With a changelog it's better
Attachment 84118 [details] did not build on qt: Build output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/8077215
Created attachment 84212 [details] Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2
Attachment 84212 [details] did not build on qt: Build output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/8070699
Created attachment 84219 [details] The ifdef trick can't work moc can't parse the Q_PROPERTY anyway because moc ignore the ifdef directives. We will just wait a bit to integrate it, but the review is still welcome.
Attachment 84219 [details] did not build on qt: Build output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/8074584
(In reply to comment #5) > Created an attachment (id=84212) [details] > Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 > > The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2 I think we should keep the trunk building with Qt 4.7.0 and 4.7.1. Moc _does_ respect #ifdefs. It's just that _some_ more complex ones, such as WebKit's #if USE(FOO) it can't, but a simple #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 it does support.
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #5) > > Created an attachment (id=84212) [details] [details] > > Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 > > > > The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2 > > I think we should keep the trunk building with Qt 4.7.0 and 4.7.1. > > Moc _does_ respect #ifdefs. It's just that _some_ more complex ones, such as WebKit's #if USE(FOO) it can't, but a simple #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 it does support. No see : "Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2" patch. Moc fail to parse the Q_PROPERTY and try to parse it even inside the ifdef :(.
(In reply to comment #10) > (In reply to comment #9) > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > Created an attachment (id=84212) [details] [details] [details] > > > Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 > > > > > > The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2 > > > > I think we should keep the trunk building with Qt 4.7.0 and 4.7.1. > > > > Moc _does_ respect #ifdefs. It's just that _some_ more complex ones, such as WebKit's #if USE(FOO) it can't, but a simple #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 it does support. > > > No see : "Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2" patch. Moc fail to parse the Q_PROPERTY and try to parse it even inside the ifdef :(. Yes, because the #ifdef looks like this: #if QT_VERSION >= QT_VERSION_CHECK(4, 7, 2) which unfortunately doesn't work with moc as moc doesn't expand macros with function style arguments. However if you write #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 then moc will get it right. (high chance :)
(In reply to comment #11) > (In reply to comment #10) > > (In reply to comment #9) > > > (In reply to comment #5) > > > > Created an attachment (id=84212) [details] [details] [details] [details] > > > > Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 > > > > > > > > The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2 > > > > > > I think we should keep the trunk building with Qt 4.7.0 and 4.7.1. > > > > > > Moc _does_ respect #ifdefs. It's just that _some_ more complex ones, such as WebKit's #if USE(FOO) it can't, but a simple #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 it does support. > > > > > > No see : "Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2" patch. Moc fail to parse the Q_PROPERTY and try to parse it even inside the ifdef :(. > > Yes, because the #ifdef looks like this: > > #if QT_VERSION >= QT_VERSION_CHECK(4, 7, 2) > > which unfortunately doesn't work with moc as moc doesn't expand macros with > function style arguments. > > However if you write > > #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 > > then moc will get it right. (high chance :) On my way to try :)
Created attachment 84551 [details] #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. Let see with that one.
Comment on attachment 84551 [details] #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. LGTM.
Comment on attachment 84551 [details] #if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. Clearing flags on attachment: 84551 Committed r80774: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/80774>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Now that Qt SDK 1.1 RC with 4.7.3 is out, the code guarded with QT_VERSION >= 0x040703 (in http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/80781) doesn't compile. Q_REVISION() for example, doesn't appear in qobjectdefs.h until 4.7.4. Therefore, attaching a patch which bumps up the version check requirement to 4.7.4. This is busting the public Symbian buildbot if we upgrade the Qt SDK to latest RC with 4.7.3.
Created attachment 90952 [details] fix Qt SDK 4.7.3 build bust due to Q_REVISION being undefined
Attachment 90952 [details] did not pass style-queue: Failed to run "['Tools/Scripts/check-webkit-style', '--diff-files', u'Source/WebKit/qt/ChangeLog', u'Source/WebK..." exit_code: 1 Source/WebKit/qt/ChangeLog:6: Line contains tab character. [whitespace/tab] [5] Total errors found: 1 in 5 files If any of these errors are false positives, please file a bug against check-webkit-style.
Created attachment 90953 [details] fix indent in Changelog
Commit Siddharth's change which is a build fix.
Comment on attachment 90953 [details] fix indent in Changelog View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=90953&action=review Oh this again. Huh. r=me > Source/WebKit/qt/ChangeLog:8 > + Macro Q_REVISION and associated qdeclrativeitem.h signals are not available in 4.7.3 headers in Nokia Qt SDK. Typo, qdeclrativeitem.h
Committed r84928: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84928>
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84928 might have broken SnowLeopard Intel Release (WebKit2 Tests) The following tests are not passing: fast/loader/file-protocol-fragment.html
This may be right for official 4.7.3 Qt builds, but trunk builds of Qt report their version as 4.8.0 -- some trunk builds (qpa) don't have the change that adds REVISION, but report their Qt versionas 4.8.0, and thus die here. I'd like to add a check for Q_REVISION -- if it's present, all this code should work. It's actually more accurate than checking the version number. Attaching patch shortly.
Created attachment 91607 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 91607 [details] Patch Just checking if Q_REVISION is defined should be enough.
Created attachment 91621 [details] Patch
(In reply to comment #27) > (From update of attachment 91607 [details]) > Just checking if Q_REVISION is defined should be enough. EWS won't work on closed bugs. ;) And it has Qt 4.7.2, because it is tha latest released Qt version now.
Reopening
Comment on attachment 91621 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 91621 Committed r85640: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/85640>