unity-mir

Merge lp://qastaging/~albaguirre/unity-mir/cross-compile-link-fix into lp://qastaging/unity-mir

  1. cross-compile-link-fix
  2. Merge into trunk
Proposed by Alberto Aguirre
Status: Merged
Approved by: Alberto Aguirre
Approved revision: 181
Merged at revision: 185
Proposed branch: lp://qastaging/~albaguirre/unity-mir/cross-compile-link-fix
Merge into: lp://qastaging/unity-mir
Diff against target: 52 lines (+8/-12)
3 files modified
src/modules/Unity/Application/CMakeLists.txt (+4/-6)
src/unity-mir/CMakeLists.txt (+2/-4)
tests/auto/modules/Unity/Application/CMakeLists.txt (+2/-2)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://qastaging/~albaguirre/unity-mir/cross-compile-link-fix
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
PS Jenkins bot (community) continuous-integration Approve
Gerry Boland (community) Approve
Review via email: mp+205690@code.qastaging.launchpad.net

Commit message

[cmake] Use XXX_LDFLAGS for libraries found with pkg_check_modules.

Using the pkg given LDFLAGS resolves linking issues when cross-compiling

Description of the change

[cmake] Use XXX_LDFLAGS for libraries found with pkg_check_modules.

Using the pkg given LDFLAGS resolves linking issues when cross-compiling as the libraries will not be in /usr/lib/...
but rather in some ${PREFIX}/usr/lib/...

pkg-config returns the correct path in to cmake in XXX_LDFLAGS, but the target cmake recipe linking the libraries has to use them.

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
Gerry Boland (gerboland) wrote :

Is there any point in having the *_LIBRARIES variables at all?

review: Needs Information
Revision history for this message
Gerry Boland (gerboland) wrote :

Seems there is, approving

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Gerry Boland (gerboland) wrote :

Yeah that makes sense now.

review: Approve
Revision history for this message
Alberto Aguirre (albaguirre) wrote :

> Is there any point in having the *_LIBRARIES variables at all?

Nope no reason.

Revision history for this message
Gerry Boland (gerboland) wrote :

@Alberto: please add in the description the review checklist questions & your answers from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Process/Merges/Checklists/Unity-Mir

Here's my corresponding review checklist:

• Did you perform an exploratory manual test run of the code change and any related functionality?
Just build script fixes, no code change. Resulting package works

• Did CI run pass? If not, please explain why.
It did

Revision history for this message
Alberto Aguirre (albaguirre) wrote :

Did you perform an exploratory manual test run of the code change and any related functionality?
Tested that code still compiled correctly and ran with unity8.

 * Did CI run pass? If not, please explain why.
The Jenkins bot in the reviewer section seems stuck so I don't know if CI run passed.

Revision history for this message
PS Jenkins bot (ps-jenkins) wrote :

FAILED: Continuous integration, rev:184
http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-ci/258/
Executed test runs:
    FAILURE: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-amd64-ci/121/console
    FAILURE: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-armhf-ci/122/console
    FAILURE: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-i386-ci/121/console

Click here to trigger a rebuild:
http://s-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/unity-mir-ci/258/rebuild

review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
PS Jenkins bot (ps-jenkins) wrote :

PASSED: Continuous integration, rev:184
http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-ci/265/
Executed test runs:
    SUCCESS: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-amd64-ci/128
    SUCCESS: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-armhf-ci/129
        deb: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-armhf-ci/129/artifact/work/output/*zip*/output.zip
    SUCCESS: http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/unity-mir-trusty-i386-ci/128

Click here to trigger a rebuild:
http://s-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/unity-mir-ci/265/rebuild

review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
Alberto Aguirre (albaguirre) wrote :

Did you perform an exploratory manual test run of the code change and any related functionality?
Tested that code still compiled correctly and ran with unity8.

 * Did CI run pass? If not, please explain why.
Yes

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches