1 |
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 15:31:43 -0400 |
2 |
Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 18:03:33 +0200 |
5 |
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
> |
7 |
> > On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:05:23 -0400 |
8 |
> > Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
11 |
> > > Hash: SHA256 |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > On 31/08/12 10:56 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: |
14 |
> > > > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
15 |
> > > >> |
16 |
> > > >> I believe that the more important direction here is to make |
17 |
> > > >> development *easier*, not harder. Adding the same DEPENDs over |
18 |
> > > >> and over again to every single package is at least frustrating. |
19 |
> > > >> Similarly frustrating would be if those 'reduced systems' had |
20 |
> > > >> to rebuild gcc every time they wanted to compile something... |
21 |
> > > >> oh wait, they would have to bootstrap it every time. |
22 |
> > > >> |
23 |
> > > > |
24 |
> > > > you would achieve it better by adding pkgconfig to DEPEND in |
25 |
> > > > eutils.eclass than putting it in @system since in the latter |
26 |
> > > > case it would also be a RDEPEND of everything basically |
27 |
> > > > |
28 |
> > > |
29 |
> > > And realistically that's where the DEPEND should be anyways, IMO |
30 |
> > > -- appended by the eclass where the function is that uses it. If |
31 |
> > > this means prune_libtool_files() gets separated out of eutils and |
32 |
> > > put in its own eclass (so that all the eutils inheritors don't |
33 |
> > > suddenly need virtual/pkgconfig unnecessarily), then so be it. |
34 |
> > |
35 |
> > I wasn't referring to the function at the moment but at the overall |
36 |
> > fact that practically any C/C++ package depending on any |
37 |
> > non-standard library practically should depend on pkg-config. A |
38 |
> > library not providing pkg-config file is simply broken. |
39 |
> > |
40 |
> |
41 |
> Hu? You know, some people think pkgconfig is a poorman's workaround |
42 |
> for a different problem. You don't need .pc files for dynamic linking |
43 |
> because: |
44 |
> 1) there is a standard include search path |
45 |
> 2) there is a standard library path |
46 |
> 3) elf shared objects support dependencies |
47 |
> |
48 |
> You might need pkgconfig for static linking because static archives do |
49 |
> not support 3). Isn't it the thing that should be improved instead ? |
50 |
> |
51 |
> Alike you claim a library not providing a .pc is broken, I can claim |
52 |
> that a library relying on it is broken because it is violating 1) |
53 |
> and/or 2) which are well established unix behavior. |
54 |
|
55 |
I'm not sure if you're aware of it but Gentoo doesn't aim at supporting |
56 |
solely Linux and no other system. |
57 |
|
58 |
Also, please tell me how to handle multiple slots sanely without |
59 |
pkg-config in a package like Boost, for example. |
60 |
|
61 |
-- |
62 |
Best regards, |
63 |
Michał Górny |