WebKit Bugzilla
New
Browse
Log In
×
Sign in with GitHub
or
Remember my login
Create Account
·
Forgot Password
Forgotten password account recovery
RESOLVED FIXED
40918
[Qt] QtDeclarative Webview element has a fixed white background
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40918
Summary
[Qt] QtDeclarative Webview element has a fixed white background
Alan Alpert
Reported
2010-06-21 08:14:57 PDT
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
Attachments
Proposed patch to implement the feature.
(6.03 KB, patch)
2011-02-28 14:14 PST
,
Alexis Menard (darktears)
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
With a changelog it's better
(7.30 KB, patch)
2011-02-28 14:16 PST
,
Alexis Menard (darktears)
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2
(7.70 KB, patch)
2011-03-01 04:50 PST
,
Alexis Menard (darktears)
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
The ifdef trick can't work moc can't parse the Q_PROPERTY anyway because moc ignore the ifdef directives.
(7.30 KB, patch)
2011-03-01 05:51 PST
,
Alexis Menard (darktears)
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
#if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try.
(7.53 KB, patch)
2011-03-03 06:23 PST
,
Alexis Menard (darktears)
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
fix Qt SDK 4.7.3 build bust due to Q_REVISION being undefined
(4.10 KB, patch)
2011-04-25 15:04 PDT
,
Siddharth Mathur
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
fix indent in Changelog
(4.11 KB, patch)
2011-04-25 15:07 PDT
,
Siddharth Mathur
kling
: review+
kling
: commit-queue-
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(3.76 KB, patch)
2011-04-28 17:46 PDT
,
Keith Kyzivat
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Patch
(3.58 KB, patch)
2011-04-28 19:32 PDT
,
Keith Kyzivat
no flags
Details
Formatted Diff
Diff
Show Obsolete
(7)
View All
Add attachment
proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Krzysztof Klinikowski
Comment 1
2011-01-30 15:07:46 PST
Any progress with that bug?
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 2
2011-02-28 14:14:06 PST
Created
attachment 84117
[details]
Proposed patch to implement the feature.
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 3
2011-02-28 14:16:47 PST
Created
attachment 84118
[details]
With a changelog it's better
Early Warning System Bot
Comment 4
2011-02-28 17:35:52 PST
Attachment 84118
[details]
did not build on qt: Build output:
http://queues.webkit.org/results/8077215
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 5
2011-03-01 04:50:14 PST
Created
attachment 84212
[details]
Make it build if Qt < 4.7.2 The Q_REVISION feature was added for Qt 4.7.2
Early Warning System Bot
Comment 6
2011-03-01 05:14:09 PST
Attachment 84212
[details]
did not build on qt: Build output:
http://queues.webkit.org/results/8070699
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 7
2011-03-01 05:51:58 PST
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.
Early Warning System Bot
Comment 8
2011-03-01 06:19:09 PST
Attachment 84219
[details]
did not build on qt: Build output:
http://queues.webkit.org/results/8074584
Simon Hausmann
Comment 9
2011-03-02 00:57:45 PST
(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.
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 10
2011-03-02 03:15:02 PST
(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 :(.
Simon Hausmann
Comment 11
2011-03-03 05:59:41 PST
(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 :)
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 12
2011-03-03 06:09:49 PST
(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 :)
Alexis Menard (darktears)
Comment 13
2011-03-03 06:23:20 PST
Created
attachment 84551
[details]
#if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. Let see with that one.
Andreas Kling
Comment 14
2011-03-10 04:51:26 PST
Comment on
attachment 84551
[details]
#if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. LGTM.
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 15
2011-03-10 15:36:45 PST
Comment on
attachment 84551
[details]
#if QT_VERSION >= 0x040702 try. Clearing flags on attachment: 84551 Committed
r80774
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/80774
>
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 16
2011-03-10 15:36:51 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Siddharth Mathur
Comment 17
2011-04-25 15:03:38 PDT
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.
Siddharth Mathur
Comment 18
2011-04-25 15:04:33 PDT
Created
attachment 90952
[details]
fix Qt SDK 4.7.3 build bust due to Q_REVISION being undefined
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 19
2011-04-25 15:07:02 PDT
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.
Siddharth Mathur
Comment 20
2011-04-25 15:07:04 PDT
Created
attachment 90953
[details]
fix indent in Changelog
Yi Shen
Comment 21
2011-04-26 06:59:52 PDT
Commit Siddharth's change which is a build fix.
Andreas Kling
Comment 22
2011-04-26 08:37:03 PDT
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
Yi Shen
Comment 23
2011-04-26 10:34:08 PDT
Committed
r84928
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/84928
>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 24
2011-04-26 11:49:16 PDT
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
Keith Kyzivat
Comment 25
2011-04-28 17:39:31 PDT
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.
Keith Kyzivat
Comment 26
2011-04-28 17:46:41 PDT
Created
attachment 91607
[details]
Patch
Andreas Kling
Comment 27
2011-04-28 17:57:54 PDT
Comment on
attachment 91607
[details]
Patch Just checking if Q_REVISION is defined should be enough.
Keith Kyzivat
Comment 28
2011-04-28 19:32:44 PDT
Created
attachment 91621
[details]
Patch
Csaba Osztrogonác
Comment 29
2011-04-29 00:43:43 PDT
(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.
Siddharth Mathur
Comment 30
2011-04-29 06:11:46 PDT
Reopening
WebKit Commit Bot
Comment 31
2011-05-03 12:51:34 PDT
Comment on
attachment 91621
[details]
Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 91621 Committed
r85640
: <
http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/85640
>
Note
You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Top of Page
Format For Printing
XML
Clone This Bug