 wgrant advised me to file separate bugs instead of one big bug (which makes sense, in hindsight...) https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=qt4-removal
 I'll send an email to ubuntu-release shortly.
[06:08] <lubot2> <Lazy B> Never heard anything about 5.11 being the last dot release. This link here tells something different http://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/02/22/qt-roadmap-2018/
 Oh?
 Maybe I misunderstood what "planning for Qt 6 after 5.11" meant.
 (In fact, I probably did.)
 Sorry.
[06:10] <lubot2> <Lazy B> I think we have at least 3 years before Qt6 will appear in some shape
 I also said that in #kubuntu-devel, not here. :P
 But yeah,
 Makes sense.
 @tsimonq2, It would be nice to follow Debian and remove qtwebkit-source before the rest of Qt (because it is a very vulnerable piece of software).
 @mitya57, See above, there's a separate removal bug for that now. :)
 Ok :)
 Many thanks to slangasek who just removed a good chunk of obsolete Plasma widgets that were Qt 4 :)
[06:29] <lubot2> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance&field.status%3Alist=FIXRELEASED&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.structural_subscriber=&field.component-empty-marker=1&field.tag=qt4-removal&field.tags_combinator=ANY&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.has_cve.used=&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.affects_me.used=&field.has_no_package.u
[06:29] <lubot2> sed=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_branches.used=&field.has_branches=on&field.has_no_branches.used=&field.has_no_branches=on&field.has_blueprints.used=&field.has_blueprints=on&field.has_no_blueprints.used=&field.has_no_blueprints=on&search=Search
 @mitya57 Here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtwebkit-source/+bug/1757846
 Too bad that we don't have bug dependencies
 You can merge bugs, I guess.
 (mark one bug as affecting a few other affected patches and mark the bugs filed against those patches as duplicates of the original)
 s/patches/packages/g
 Nah, I would better leave these as separate bugs and add links to Debian BTS for packages I'm interested in.
 Alright
 I might as well go through and add links to the BTS for all of these
 There is a list of Debian bugs at https://wiki.debian.org/Qt4Removal
 Right, I linked that wiki page in all the bug descriptions in Ubuntu :)
 Oh :)
 why is qtvirtualkeyboaud not built with languages?  (CONFIG += lang-all)
 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1758099
 Why is it not the default build configuration?
[17:54] <lisandro> is it because the build expects all languages available at build time?
[17:54] <lisandro> I've read something alongside that in a kde ml
[17:55] <lisandro> if someone can confirm it *maybe* we can trick hunspell/myspell maintainers to provide a metapackage
[17:57] <lisandro> https://doc.qt.io/qt-5.10/qtvirtualkeyboard-build.html might shed some light
[17:59] <lisandro> we might need to pass lang-all
[17:59]  * lisandro tries
[18:01] <acheronuk> would be nice if its that simple!
[18:01] <lisandro> it owuld
[18:01] <lisandro> but I think it needs all those packages
[18:02] <acheronuk> opensuse and arch build requires are just hunspell, so the actual input lang support may be internal?
[18:02] <lisandro> does opensuse and arch ship each lang in a separate package?
[18:03] <lisandro> the current build dependnecies need hunspell-en-gb
[18:06] <lisandro> mitya57: by the way I am currently needing to add testing to sources.list in order to fullfil qt's needs on gtk
[18:06] <lisandro> I do realy hope it's a bug somewhere else
[18:07] <mitya57> Qt does not need gtk, only qt5-gtk-platformtheme depends on it but it is an optional package
[18:07] <lisandro> if I get to re do a chroot for tetting I'll show you
[18:07] <lisandro> *testing
[18:09] <acheronuk> arch seem to split hunspell
[18:10] <lisandro> do the use CONFIG+=all-langs ?
[18:10] <lisandro> er, lang-all
[18:11] <mitya57> yes: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/qt5-virtualkeyboard#n27
[18:11] <mitya57> also handwriting, that may be useful for us too
[18:12] <acheronuk> lisandro: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/PKGBUILD?h=packages/qt5-virtualkeyboard
[18:13] <lisandro> except we can't use handwriting
[18:16] <acheronuk> # Only enable languages that don't force-include bundled 3rdparty libs
[18:16] <acheronuk> %qmake5 "CONFIG+=lang-ar_AR lang-da_DK lang-de_DE lang-en_GB lang-es_ES lang-fa_FA lang-fi_FI lang-fr_FR lang-hi_IN lang-it_IT lang-nb_NO lang-pl_PL lang-pt_PT lang-ro_RO lang-ru_RU lang-sv_SE"
[18:16] <acheronuk> that is opensuse ^^
[18:17] <lisandro> let's try lang-all then
[18:19] <lisandro> oh, not possible
[18:19] <lisandro> I see what opensuse does
[18:19] <lisandro> we are removing tcime and pinyin
[18:20] <lisandro> from 3rdparty
[18:21] <lisandro> but I think we better use a patch for that
 Just for more statistics, Fedora also uses lang-all: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qt5-qtvirtualkeyboard/blob/master/f/qt5-qtvirtualkeyboard.spec#_52
[18:25] <lisandro> but also builds the 3rdparty tcime and pinyin which e do not ship due to dfsg
[18:25] <lisandro> *we do not
[18:26] <acheronuk> lisandro: 'we' as in debian AND ubuntu?
[18:26] <lisandro> yes, we both adhere to them
[18:26] <lisandro> well, at least I think you also have that part removed
[18:26] <lisandro> but feel free to check :-)
[18:28] <acheronuk> must do, as my test build just crashed and burned on those :P
[18:28] <lisandro> :-)
[18:31] <lisandro> yup, will have a patch soon
[18:32] <acheronuk> thanks :)
[18:32] <lisandro> my pleasure! always good if we can improve stuff!
[18:40] <lisandro> I might enable handwriting support too
[18:41] <lisandro> acheronuk: patch already in salsa.d.o
[18:41] <lisandro> + rules changes
[18:53] <acheronuk> great
[18:53] <lisandro> I might add arrow-key-navigation
[18:54] <acheronuk> :D
[19:03] <lisandro> acheronuk: everything on salsa.d.o now
[19:21] <acheronuk> applying to 5.9.4
[19:28] <acheronuk> and fails to build. test errors
[19:29] <lisandro> yes, they are flacky
[19:29] <lisandro> if you check debian/rules you will see that we are ignoring the errors
[19:29] <lisandro> not the best thing to do, but....
[19:29] <lisandro> also you need all the locales for all langs for the tests to pass
[19:31] <acheronuk> ignoring with what?
[19:32] <acheronuk> I see you ignoring on arm64?
[20:05] <acheronuk> ah. I see what you did. just being blind
[20:12] <acheronuk> lisandro: https://i.imgur.com/MxRbHkv.png
[21:24] <lisandro> Excellent!!