Tomas Popela wrote:
> Why do you think that Tom has to look at the qt5-qtwebengine package
> when that package reuses our stuff from Chromium packaging?
Because I have additional changes that the Chromium packaging does not have,
or at least did not have last I checked?
I have at least:
* updated FFmpeg cleaning scripts to keep ARM and AArch64 files (a list of
the latter contributed by the AArch64 architecture maintainer),
* support for i686 without SSE2, with runtime SSE2 detection (193 KiB patch)
– for Chromium, a few more files would need to be patched (which
QtWebEngine does not even include in its tarballs, so I cannot patch them
in my patch): at least, you will probably also want to revert the
remaining parts of review 511773002 and the review 296663002,
* a more polished list (2 hours of work) of Provides: bundled(…) (but I only
listed the stuff that QtWebEngine is actually 1. shipping and 2. building,
so copying it to Chromium as is would be wrong),
* a patch from Debian to not build the bundled prtime from NSPR and use the
one from the system NSPR instead, which is already linked for NSS
certificate support anyway,
* a patch from me to similarly not build the bundled UTF functions from ICU
and use the ones from the already linked system ICU.
There are more changes, but the above are the ones that should be relevant
to upstream Chromium too.
I also started poking at the Samsung GStreamer backend in a dist-git branch,
but it is not working yet. (I don't even have it compiling because
gstreamer1-plugins-bad-free is not built with the required compiler option.)
So this stuff is not merged into master nor of course any release branch.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
