| 1 |
Dnia 2014-05-12, o godz. 21:24:26 |
| 2 |
Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 12/05/14 20:47, Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 6 |
> >>> Longterm, this makes it year after year more difficult to develop |
| 7 |
> >>> software for "Linux". |
| 8 |
> >> I'm with you here, but what is the solution? |
| 9 |
> >> |
| 10 |
> >> If we say we stick to upstream then we don't provide pkg-config files |
| 11 |
> >> at all (in these cases). |
| 12 |
> > I think this is a sane default. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Except having pkg-config is the only way to fix some of the build issues |
| 15 |
> we are seeing |
| 16 |
> today, like getting 'Libs.private: ' for static linking, there has been |
| 17 |
> multiple bugs lately, |
| 18 |
> and we are in middle of process of obsoleting every custom foo-config |
| 19 |
> due to same |
| 20 |
> reasons, so having pkg-config files is an absolute requirement. |
| 21 |
> Some binary-only distros might get away without them, but we won't. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Err, you can disallow static linking. Simple solution with extra |
| 24 |
advantages like improving security. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Michał Górny |
Archives