[poppler] Last, Few Build Questions

[Kyle Auble]

On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 at 01:10:47 AM +0200, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El dijous, 24 de setembre de 2020, a les 3:21:00 CEST, Kyle Auble va 
> escriure:
>>  ....
>> 
>> 
>>  However, if I configure to build with clang, I don't even reach that
>>  point. My logs show g-ir-scanner trying to link with gcc anyways, 
>> then
>>  failing to find the sanitizer libraries.
>> 
>>  * I'm leaning towards g-ir-scanner being the cause, but could it be 
>> a
>>  Poppler issue?
> 
> I know nothing of glib stuff, you'll have to hope someone else 
> answers.

It took a little sleuthing, but it's definitely g-ir-scanner.
Apparently, it will recognize an env-var, but otherwise will default to
the system's Python settings.

So the workaround is a snap (just export CC=clang), but even if the GLib
team doesn't want to implement a flag, it really could be documented
better.

>>  2. The GLib tests also fail at linking if ubsan is enabled....
>> 
>>  * At that point, I'm thinking it's more of an issue with 
>> extra-cmake-
>>  modules for not checking & handling this behavior.
> 
> Yes, probably a ECM issue, when we did code that we didn't think of 
> C-only code, KDE doesn't have much of those, patches to 
> https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/extra-cmake-modules/ welcome. Add 
> me @aacid as reviewer if you do :)

OK, I've made notes so I might send in a patch once I reach my next
waypoint here.

>>  3. For the project generally, how much appetite is there for minor 
>> code
>>  refactoring? Do you all prefer "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", 
>> or do
>>  you typically accept minor changes to streamline the code?
> 
> Patches that defenitely make the code better are accepted. But of 
> course you have to accept we may disagree on what "makes the code 
> better" mean.

Sounds good. It's just a couple of spots in the CMake scripts for now. I
think they can be deduplicated, but I'll keep the commits granular, and
put them in a separate merge-request to review.

Kyle