[qwt-qt6] new port #20921

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T05:42:50Z

Describe the pull request

What does your PR fix?

Fixes [qwt] provides qt6 version (won't fix) #20836
Which triplets are supported/not supported? Have you updated the CI baseline?

<all / linux, windows, ...>, <Yes/No>
Does your PR follow the maintainer guide?

Your answer
If you have added/updated a port: Have you run ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committed the result?

If you are still working on the PR, open it as a Draft: https://github.blog/2019-02-14-introducing-draft-pull-requests/

ghost · 2021-10-22T05:43:03Z

All CLA requirements met.

ports/qwt/vcpkg.json

ports/qwt-qt5/vcpkg.json

JackBoosY · 2021-10-22T05:48:12Z

Also please sign CLA.

github-actions

This is a new experimental fast check for PR issues. Please let us know if this bot is helpful!

PRs must add only one version and must not modify any published versions

When making any changes to a library, the version or port-version in vcpkg.json or CONTROL must be modified.

Error: Local changes detected for qwt but no changes to version or port version.
-- Version: 6.2.0
-- Old SHA: e7204097fda082c43e704e356702fd77aa3c9a52
-- New SHA: fdfaffe15fff0c27dfe99119dd0ffc09630038ba
-- Did you remember to update the version or port version?
-- Pass `--overwrite-version` to bypass this check.
***No files were updated.***

After committing all other changes, the version database must be updated

git add -u && git commit
git checkout 506a0d251720d6f5c020b0afcac751f5c6ec6c42 -- versions
./vcpkg x-add-version --all

Diff

diff --git a/versions/baseline.json b/versions/baseline.json
index 6843275..0cdc76d 100644
--- a/versions/baseline.json
+++ b/versions/baseline.json
@@ -5754,7 +5754,7 @@
     },
     "qwt": {
       "baseline": "6.2.0",
-      "port-version": 1
+      "port-version": 0
     },
     "qwt-qt5": {
       "baseline": "6.2.0",
diff --git a/versions/q-/qwt.json b/versions/q-/qwt.json
index 6b6f7a0..21451b5 100644
--- a/versions/q-/qwt.json
+++ b/versions/q-/qwt.json
@@ -1,10 +1,5 @@
 {
   "versions": [
-    {
-      "git-tree": "fdfaffe15fff0c27dfe99119dd0ffc09630038ba",
-      "version-semver": "6.2.0",
-      "port-version": 1
-    },
     {
       "git-tree": "e7204097fda082c43e704e356702fd77aa3c9a52",
       "version-semver": "6.2.0",

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T06:25:50Z

Why The CIs are building packages other than qwt and qwt-qt5?

dg0yt · 2021-10-22T06:51:29Z

Why The CIs are building packages other than qwt and qwt-qt5?

The CI builds all packages which are not found in cache. There were recent merges to master, so there can be cache misses also for unrelated packages. This is a known CI issue, and there is work in progress to improve this.

JackBoosY · 2021-10-22T06:57:42Z

Please ping me if this PR is ready for review.

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T07:28:22Z

How to mark/declare conflicting packages?

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T08:02:06Z

I have added a patch to qwt-qt5 to rename the library to qwt-qt5.

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T09:21:12Z

I have just taken a look at azure pipelines, Hours of CI are wasted to build unrelated packages with every push.

Shouldn't these packages got built and cached just after their PRs got merged.

dg0yt · 2021-10-22T09:31:00Z

I have just taken a look at azure pipelines, Hours of CI are wasted to build unrelated packages with every push.

Shouldn't these packages got built and cached just after their PRs got merged.

The details are off-topic for your PR. I only want to point to microsoft/vcpkg-tool#210 now, and hope to see it in production very soon.

JackBoosY · 2021-10-22T09:49:01Z

How to mark/declare conflicting packages?

if (EXISTS "${CURRENT_INSTALLED_DIR}/share/CONFLICT_PORT_NAME/copyright")
   # Conflict detected.
endif()

scripts/ci.baseline.txt

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T13:14:24Z

I suspect that arm64_windows failure is related to #20933

MehdiChinoune · 2021-10-22T15:06:55Z

qwt was not building with Qt6.
#20935 should be merged first.

Update:
I was right, doing a clean build of qwt on windows fails by not finding qmake.
Unless #20933 got fixed, this PR does change nothing.

ports/qwt-qt6/portfile.cmake

BillyONeal · 2021-11-26T09:45:21Z

scripts/ci.baseline.txt

@@ -1231,6 +1231,7 @@ quickfix:x64-windows-static-md=fail
 quickfix:x64-windows=fail
 quickfix:x86-windows=fail
 qwt:x64-osx=fail
+qwt-qt6:x64-osx=fail


I'm testing on a mac now...

BillyONeal · 2021-11-26T11:26:54Z

The osx failure is:

make[1]: *** No rule to make target `/Users/bion/vcpkg/installed/x64-osx/debug/lib/libQt6OpenGLWidgets.a', needed by `../lib/libqwt.6.2.0.dylib'.  Stop.
make: *** [sub-src-all-ordered] Error 2

I observe there is no libQt6OpenGLWidgets.a but there is installed/x64-osx/debug/lib/libQt6OpenGLWidgets_debug.a Is that ringing any bells in terms of obvious mixups?

Neumann-A · 2021-11-26T11:38:41Z

Is that ringing any bells in terms of obvious mixups?

looks like it is setup the wrong way. Maybe the PRL file for libQt6OpenGLWidgets is wrong?

Co-Authored-By: Billy O'Neal <[email protected]>

MehdiChinoune · 2021-11-26T16:22:55Z

I think the macos failure is not from the qwt side. So could you please merge this PR and resolve/discuss the issue in another PR.

BillyONeal · 2021-11-27T06:09:29Z

The reason I’m trying to run this down is that we generally try to avoid adding new ci.baseline.txt entries unless we are doing a major bulk add (e.g. turning on a new platform or triplet) or have some understanding as to why our infrastructure can’t test a particular port.

That said, that desire isn’t absolute; I want to make sure an attempt has been made to avoid adding that entry, but it isn’t the end of the world if not.

You said you expect the build system here is reading “PRL” files?

MehdiChinoune · 2021-11-29T14:10:21Z

Another issue!
I should wait for another 2-4 weeks to be fixed by another PR, and then I have to rebase my changes which will maybe lead to the discovery of another issue, and so on...

JackBoosY · 2021-11-30T02:09:51Z

Please ping me if you continue this PR.

MehdiChinoune · 2021-11-30T05:52:18Z

depends on #21695

BillyONeal · 2021-11-30T07:48:02Z

Another issue! I should wait for another 2-4 weeks to be fixed by another PR, and then I have to rebase my changes which will maybe lead to the discovery of another issue, and so on...

I think the existence of #21695 provides the understanding of the issue that I was looking for, thanks!

[qwt-qt6] new port (microsoft#20921)

BillyONeal · 2021-12-02T03:46:17Z

Unfortunately this has caused breakage in our most recent full catalog build:

    Installing package qwt-qt6[core]:x86-windows...
    The following files are already installed in D:/installed/x86-windows and are in conflict with qwt-qt6:x86-windows

    Installed by qwt:x86-windows
        bin/qwt.dll
        debug/bin/qwtd.dll
        debug/lib/qwtd.lib
        lib/qwt.lib

    Elapsed time for package qwt-qt6:x86-windows: 34.6 s

Any chance we could convince upstream to make these side-by-side-able or should we disable one or the other in CI?

MehdiChinoune · 2021-12-02T04:23:57Z

Unfortunately this has caused breakage in our most recent full catalog build:
    Installing package qwt-qt6[core]:x86-windows...
    The following files are already installed in D:/installed/x86-windows and are in conflict with qwt-qt6:x86-windows

    Installed by qwt:x86-windows
        bin/qwt.dll
        debug/bin/qwtd.dll
        debug/lib/qwtd.lib
        lib/qwt.lib

    Elapsed time for package qwt-qt6:x86-windows: 34.6 s
Any chance we could convince upstream to make these side-by-side-able or should we disable one or the other in CI?

Some Linux distributions rename them to qwt-qt5 and qwt-qt6 to remove the conflict. I tried to do the same but @JackBoosY refused.

JackBoosY · 2021-12-02T06:27:24Z

We should not rename the official library name, we should skip one of them in ci.baseline.txt.

BillyONeal · 2021-12-02T23:57:09Z

We should not rename the official library name, we should skip one of them in ci.baseline.txt.

Under normal circumstances we should not do that, but the qt5/qt6 split here is a little different in that there appears to be no canonical names for distinguishing to match from upstream. RedHat, Debian etc. all have different ways of doing that selection.

However, given that this new port is causing failures to show up in other ports, I'm removing it again in #21825 . I discussed this with other maintainers @ras0219 / @ras0219-msft and @vicroms to figure out what a reasonable answer would be. Together we can up with the following list of things that would have to change if you want this port back @MehdiChinoune :

This port and the qwt one need to some how feed into the qwt build system which version of qt they are expected to build with; as far as we can tell this construction is path dependent (e.g. vcpkg install qt5-base && vcpkg install qwt-qt6 doesn't necessarily produce the same qwt bits as vcpkg install qwt-qt6 because the selection is done by guessing from previous dependencies)
The headers should be installed to something like qt6/qwt, so that someone can ensure they get the qt6 versions by adding that earlier on their include path. (We observe that this pattern is what Red Hat does and we like it)
The build system should be patched to add some kind of qt6 marker to the binary names so that they are side by side able with the qwt port.
(ideally, but we wouldn't block over) There should be some form of pkgconfig files which make downstream consumption reasonably easy.

Alternately, you could look at adding a qt6 version of the port to a different registry. See example public ones in #17161

We are sorry that the road has been so long on this one but we have to place a premium on not breaking folks over new things being added. It would be nice to have some kind of 'meta' port story in the future to more easily solve conditional alternative dependencies like this in the future, but we don't know exactly what that would look like at this time and don't want to ask you to do that kind of major feature development to get a port you want.

MehdiChinoune · 2021-12-03T06:43:38Z

I have packaged qwt(-qt6) for both Homebrew and MINGW and both have a way to mark packages conflicting.
Homebrew/homebrew-core#84246
msys2/MINGW-packages#9210

I don't see adding a package to ci-baseline as a mechanism to declare conflict, a user will end up trying to install both.

ras0219-msft · 2021-12-03T07:23:27Z

Our goals with vcpkg are slightly different from those systems; whereas Homebrew and MINGW both have the ultimate goal of providing applications (and libraries are a means to those ends), vcpkg's ultimate goal is to provide a coherent set of libraries for development (and applications are a means to those ends). At the end of the day, vcpkg is a C/C++ library management tool, not a Linux(-ish) system package manager even though we share a lot of common themes.

Our eventual goal is what @BillyONeal mentioned at the end:

It would be nice to have some kind of 'meta' port story in the future to more easily solve conditional alternative dependencies like this

Users should be able to easily decide whether they want to use qt5 or qt6, and then just install qwt which will use their chosen version of Qt. It would be unfortunate to duplicate every package downstream of qt into -qt5 and -qt6 variants, because a user can never use both at the same time (and indeed -- might not even care!). Plus, imagine a world with more than just qt handled this way; you'd need 2^N packages to handle the explosion of boost-w/libressl-w/qt6-w/opencv3-....

NancyLi1013 assigned JackBoosY Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY added the category:new-port The issue is requesting a new library to be added; consider making a PR! label Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY suggested changes Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

ports/qwt/vcpkg.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

JackBoosY suggested changes Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

ports/qwt-qt5/vcpkg.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

github-actions bot requested changes Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch 2 times, most recently from 9547b2e to 7976ff3 Compare October 22, 2021 06:02

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch from 7976ff3 to c72a239 Compare October 22, 2021 06:32

github-actions bot approved these changes Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch from c72a239 to 6535720 Compare October 22, 2021 08:00

github-actions bot approved these changes Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch 3 times, most recently from 6c343f5 to 141aecd Compare October 22, 2021 12:17

cenit reviewed Oct 22, 2021

View reviewed changes

scripts/ci.baseline.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch 2 times, most recently from 66bf776 to 5c83a0f Compare October 22, 2021 14:23

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch from 5c83a0f to e56065a Compare October 22, 2021 17:46

JackBoosY added info:reviewed Pull Request changes follow basic guidelines and removed requires:author-response labels Nov 25, 2021

BillyONeal reviewed Nov 26, 2021

View reviewed changes

JackBoosY added requires:author-response and removed info:reviewed Pull Request changes follow basic guidelines labels Nov 26, 2021

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch from e41fac7 to b907668 Compare November 26, 2021 10:17

[qwt-qt6] new port

fc9fa00

Co-Authored-By: Billy O'Neal <[email protected]>

MehdiChinoune force-pushed the qwt-qt6 branch from b907668 to fc9fa00 Compare November 26, 2021 12:45

JackBoosY added depends:different-pr This PR or Issue depends on a PR which has been filed and removed requires:author-response labels Nov 30, 2021

github-actions bot approved these changes Nov 30, 2021

View reviewed changes

BillyONeal merged commit a295be2 into microsoft:master Nov 30, 2021

BillyONeal mentioned this pull request Nov 30, 2021

[qt5-base] no _debug lib suffixes on macOS (#14225) #21695

Merged

Jimmy-Hu added a commit to Jimmy-Hu/vcpkg that referenced this pull request Nov 30, 2021

Merge pull request #848 from microsoft/master

0aa7acf

[qwt-qt6] new port (microsoft#20921)

MehdiChinoune deleted the qwt-qt6 branch December 2, 2021 05:41

Neumann-A mentioned this pull request Nov 16, 2022

[qwt|vcpkg-qmake] Update and switch to Qt6 #22012

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[qwt-qt6] new port #20921

[qwt-qt6] new port #20921

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

ghost commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited by ghost

Loading

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

github-actions bot left a comment

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

dg0yt commented Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

dg0yt commented Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

BillyONeal Nov 26, 2021

BillyONeal commented Nov 26, 2021

Neumann-A commented Nov 26, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 26, 2021 •

edited

Loading

BillyONeal commented Nov 27, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 29, 2021

JackBoosY commented Nov 30, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 30, 2021

BillyONeal commented Nov 30, 2021

BillyONeal commented Dec 2, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Dec 2, 2021

JackBoosY commented Dec 2, 2021

BillyONeal commented Dec 2, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Dec 3, 2021

ras0219-msft commented Dec 3, 2021

[qwt-qt6] new port #20921

[qwt-qt6] new port #20921

Conversation

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 • edited Loading

What does your PR fix?

Which triplets are supported/not supported? Have you updated the CI baseline?

Does your PR follow the maintainer guide?

If you have added/updated a port: Have you run ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committed the result?

ghost commented Oct 22, 2021 • edited by ghost Loading

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

dg0yt commented Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

dg0yt commented Oct 22, 2021

JackBoosY commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 • edited Loading

BillyONeal Nov 26, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

BillyONeal commented Nov 26, 2021

Neumann-A commented Nov 26, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 26, 2021 • edited Loading

BillyONeal commented Nov 27, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 29, 2021

JackBoosY commented Nov 30, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 30, 2021

BillyONeal commented Nov 30, 2021

BillyONeal commented Dec 2, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Dec 2, 2021

JackBoosY commented Dec 2, 2021

BillyONeal commented Dec 2, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Dec 3, 2021

ras0219-msft commented Dec 3, 2021

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

If you have added/updated a port: Have you run `./vcpkg x-add-version --all` and committed the result?

ghost commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited by ghost

Loading

MehdiChinoune commented Oct 22, 2021 •

edited

Loading

MehdiChinoune commented Nov 26, 2021 •

edited

Loading