Now the --minimal build is broken with Qt 5 with the following errors: /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginProcess.cpp: In member function 'void WebKit::PluginProcess::initialize(int, WebCore::RunLoop*)': /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginProcess.cpp:95: error: 'NetscapePlugin' has not been declared ... /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginControllerProxy.cpp:88: error: 'releaseNPObject' was not declared in this scope /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginControllerProxy.cpp:91: error: 'releaseNPObject' was not declared in this scope ... /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/qt/PluginProcessMainQt.cpp:59: error: ‘QLibrary’ was not declared in this scope Do we want to support --minial build for Qt 5 WK2? Or should we do --minimal --no-webkit2 build on the minimal bot? (It works fine.)
(In reply to comment #0) > Now the --minimal build is broken with Qt 5 with the following errors: > /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginProcess.cpp: In member function 'void WebKit::PluginProcess::initialize(int, WebCore::RunLoop*)': > /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginProcess.cpp:95: error: 'NetscapePlugin' has not been declared > ... > /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginControllerProxy.cpp:88: error: 'releaseNPObject' was not declared in this scope > /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/PluginControllerProxy.cpp:91: error: 'releaseNPObject' was not declared in this scope > ... > /home/oszi/WebKit/Source/WebKit2/PluginProcess/qt/PluginProcessMainQt.cpp:59: error: ‘QLibrary’ was not declared in this scope These look like a guard is missing somewhere. Is the revision which broke the build known? > > Do we want to support --minial build for Qt 5 WK2? > Or should we do --minimal --no-webkit2 build on the minimal bot? (It works fine.) I personally think the minimal build is still valuable for testing at least one set of feature guards and as far as I remember the maintenance cost is not that high since the breakages were considerable rare.
I personally don't see much value in a minimal build, I never use it myself. So from my perspective it adds cost (maintenance) without any concrete value. If you guys would like to maintain such a combination, then that's fine with me.
(In reply to comment #2) > I personally don't see much value in a minimal build, I never use it myself. So from my perspective it adds cost (maintenance) without any concrete value. > > If you guys would like to maintain such a combination, then that's fine with me. Of course nobody use --minimal build, because it is too lightweight to be useful in a real world application. But it is useful to prevent breaking ENABLE(...)/USE(...) guards. If somebody try to use a function outside ENABLE(FOO) guard which is defined inside ENABLE(FOO) guard, it will cause link fail on the --minimal bot. The maintanance cost of it is minimal. Usually it's more than enough to ping the author and he/she will fix the breakage. The question is now if we want to fix Qt-WK2 build with disabled ENABLE_NETSCAPE_PLUGIN_API or not. If no, we can simple use minimal bot with --minimal --no-webkit2.
(In reply to comment #3) > The question is now if we want to fix Qt-WK2 build with > disabled ENABLE_NETSCAPE_PLUGIN_API or not. If no, we > can simple use minimal bot with --minimal --no-webkit2. I think supporting a build configuration for platforms that do not have NPAPI support makes sense. Any non-X11 linux based mobile platform for example falls into that category right now.