Build failed in Jenkins: ktexteditor_master_qt5 #787

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See -- [...truncated 418 lines...] Removing autotests/input/indent/ruby/array-comment5/actual Removing autotests/input/indent/ruby/array1/actual Removing autotests/input/indent/ruby/array10/actual Removi

Build failed in Jenkins: kdeclarative_stable_qt5 #75

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See -- Started by remote host 2a01:4f8:160:9363::9 with note: Triggered by commit Building remotely on LinuxSlave - 3 (PACKAGER LINBUILDER) in workspace

Build failed in Jenkins: kdeclarative_stable_qt5 #77

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See -- Started by user aacid Building remotely on LinuxSlave - 3 (PACKAGER LINBUILDER) in workspace Running Prebuild steps [kdeclarative_stable_qt5

Build failed in Jenkins: frameworkintegration_master_qt5 #183

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See -- Started by remote host 2a01:4f8:160:9363::9 with note: Triggered by commit Building remotely on LinuxSlave - 3 (PACKAGER LINBUILDER) in workspace

Jenkins build is back to normal : kdeclarative_stable_qt5 #78

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

Jenkins build is back to normal : frameworkintegration_master_qt5 #184

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

Jenkins build is back to normal : ktexteditor_master_qt5 #788

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

Jenkins build is back to normal : kcmutils_stable_qt5 #25

2015-03-24 Thread KDE CI System
See ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel

Re: Review Request 120393: [kdelibs4support] Kill dead code

2015-03-24 Thread Albert Astals Cid
> On mar. 18, 2015, 11:23 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > I'm all for getting rid of the Nepomuk code. However, I'm not too sure > > about the strigi part. That should still work. > > Hrvoje Senjan wrote: > It does not ;-) > Originally, this review added back the find_package(Strigi) cal