Re: [gentoo-dev] prune_libtool_files() and pkg-config dependency

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:18:20 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:05:19 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:50:16 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> >> >> > One thing that comes into my mind is finally making pkgconfig
>> >> >> > a required, implicit part of toolchain (or @system). Since we
>> >> >> > have pkgconf now, this is more feasible than before.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> i don't think making it part of the toolchain makes sense.  i'd
>> >> >> rather not add it to @system simply to keep a few packages from
>> >> >> sometimes failing.
>> >> >
>> >> > I'd add it to @system because a lot of packages actually need to
>> >> > DEPEND on pkgconfig because they use libraries using .pc files.
>> >> > And the number is going to increase, hopefully.
>> >>
>> >> sure, but keeping things in @system doesn't make much sense:
>> >>  - there's a penalty (as noted in old threads)
>> >>  - it isn't actually required at runtime, so it's bloat on reduced
>> >> systems
>> >
>> > I think it's practically the same as compiler.
>>
>> that isn't a bad view point, but for the purposes of this discussion,
>> i don't think it's relevant :)
>
> Will it be a better view point if I opened a separate discussion about
> putting pkg-config in @system? It could get more attention probably.

my answer would still be a very strong no
-mike