linux-kernel - Re: xconfig is broken again on Qt5

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 14 Sep 2020 22:56:23 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Cc:     Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xconfig is broken again on Qt5

On 9/14/20 10:41 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue, 15 Sep 2020 00:25:07 +0900
> Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> escreveu:
> 
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2020 at 10:21 PM Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I hate to say it, but xconfig got broken again.
>>>
>>> After commit 68fd110b3e7e2 ("kconfig: qconf: remove redundant help in the info view")
>>> help description disappered completely from xconfig (both normal and split mode)
>>>
>>> I reverted this and next commit to get this back.
>>>
>>> I have a feeling that there were several bugs introduced to xconfig recently
>>> due to attempt to support both Qt4 and Qt5. Maybe we should only support one version?  
>>
>>
>> xconfig was originally written for Qt3, and
>> got broken in many ways after being converted to Qt5.
>> (commit 8328447af88eaab1d thru b4ff1de3b8381a4)
>>
>> That is my gut feeling.
>>
>> So, xconfig carried broken code everywhere
>> for many years.
>>
>> I think supporting both Qt4 and Qt5
>> is doable, but testing both versions is tedious.
>> I'd like to want to drop Qt4 support in the future but
>> not in this development cycle because there are still
>> some people using Qt4.
> 
> My 2 cents here: I ported Kaffeine from Qt4 to Qt5. When I did that,
> I tried to make it compatible with both, but that was not easy. So,
> it now supports only Qt5. Ok, Kaffeine uses a lot of different APIs.
> 
> It is probably doable to keep xconfig compatible with both Qt4 and
> Qt5, but not sure if it is worth the efforts, as Qt5 was released 
> at the end of 2012. So, I guess that all distros should have Qt5
> packages, even the LTS ones.
> 
>> Recently I changed xconfig a lot because I noticed
>> various bugs, and also needed to simplify the code
>> for better maintainability.
>>
>>
>> Sorry for the pain, but we need to change the code
>> to make it stable and maintainable.
>>
>> For the reported issue,
>> does this work for you?
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11774055/
>>
>>
>>> I tried gconfig even thinking maybe nobody uses xconfig these days
>>> but gconfig seems to lack search function.  
>>
>> gconfig is not well maintained either.
>>
>> I think it should be converted from gtk+2 to gtk+3
>> and I know various bugs that need fixing
>> (but I have not been able to find time to work on it...)
> 
> Such conversion can also be painful. I also did two such
> conversions for other media packages (Camorama and ZBar). Also,
> gtk4 is close to be released:
> 
> 	https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=GTK-3.99.1-Released
> 
> Porting from gtk+3 to gtk4 is also painful. I tried to prepare
> Camorama (which currently supports both gtk+2 and gtk+3) for gtk4, 
> but one of the fundamental features needed for it to work was dropped
> (a way to write video images inside a widget). Last time I checked,
> there were no obvious replacement for it (didn't check 3.99 yet).
> 
> Maybe the main point here is if we should keep maintaining two
> GUI frontends.


I can't recall (m)any gconfig users.
And it is missing some critical features IMO, like Search.


-- 
~Randy