Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Banning modification of pkg-config files

[Peter Stuge]

Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >> If we say we stick to upstream then we don't provide pkg-config files
> >> at all (in these cases).
>
> > I think this is a sane default.
>
> Except having pkg-config is the only way to fix some of the build
> issues we are seeing today, like getting 'Libs.private: ' for
> static linking, there has been multiple bugs lately,

I honestly don't think that it's Gentoo's place to fix those issues.

Just error out. Make users complain to upstream when upstream has a
problem. Don't hide the problem and amass a huge support workload.


> and we are in middle of process of obsoleting every custom foo-config

Again I don't think that's Gentoo's decision to make. It could
certainly be a user's decision, but complexity would explode.


> so having pkg-config files is an absolute requirement.

You haven't provided a rationale, only a circular argument:

"We're taking action which requires .pc so having .pc is a requirement."

My key point is that it isn't Gentoo's responsibility or duty to fix
problems introduced by upstreams, even if Gentoo developers are so
skilled that they would be able to.

I think your time is better spent on things that are not broken.


> Some binary-only distros might get away without them, but we won't.

I think it's perfectly fine to refuse including something that is
broken and unmaintainable. That doesn't mean that one has to be an
asshole about it and treat requsts badly however. It's easy to
politely decline. "This is too much effort for me to maintain.
Please become a developer and maintain it if you want it, or proxy
maintain it."


> > If upstream pkg A depends on $distro-specific foo of pkg B then that
> > will obviously not work in an environment only following upstreams,
> > and will require effort to untie gentoo pkg A from $distro specifics.
>
> pkg-config by design works without .pc files if needed,
> so if this is the only problem with them, it's really no problem

I think it is a problem, because Gentoo starts having an opinion.

I don't like that. For me, Gentoo is all about letting me decide.

That means I must be exposed to broken upstreams, so that *I* can
decide how to deal with them.

Maybe introduce a USE flag for installing .pc:s in ${FILESDIR} ?


> at all compared to the problems caused by lacking the pkg-config files

Don't own those problems - they aren't yours.


> (Are we seriously discussing banning something useful as pkg-config
> files?! That's retarded. Must be some joke.)

I don't think I said to ban them. I said that I want Gentoo to stay
close to upstream by default. I also said that maintainers shouldn't
be expected to untie upstream bugknots.

Please do not call me retarded again.


Thanks

//Peter