1 |
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:50:16 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote: |
4 |
>> > In other words, pkg-config is only used when no other criteria |
5 |
>> > allows it to classify the particular .la file as suitable for |
6 |
>> > removal or not. Sadly, it's rather, ehm, unfriendly to ebuild |
7 |
>> > developers who obviously don't even read the relevant part. |
8 |
>> > |
9 |
>> > Do you have any ideas how we can improve that? |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> before the func executes pkg-config, run `has virtual/pkgconfig |
12 |
>> ${DEPEND}` and spit an eqawarn if it's not found |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Ciaran will shot at me for doing that. |
15 |
|
16 |
it isn't violating anything and can find real bugs. i don't see a problem here. |
17 |
|
18 |
>> > One thing that comes into my mind is finally making pkgconfig |
19 |
>> > a required, implicit part of toolchain (or @system). Since we have |
20 |
>> > pkgconf now, this is more feasible than before. |
21 |
>> |
22 |
>> i don't think making it part of the toolchain makes sense. i'd rather |
23 |
>> not add it to @system simply to keep a few packages from sometimes |
24 |
>> failing. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> I'd add it to @system because a lot of packages actually need to DEPEND |
27 |
> on pkgconfig because they use libraries using .pc files. And the number |
28 |
> is going to increase, hopefully. |
29 |
|
30 |
sure, but keeping things in @system doesn't make much sense: |
31 |
- there's a penalty (as noted in old threads) |
32 |
- it isn't actually required at runtime, so it's bloat on reduced systems |
33 |
|
34 |
> Also, some people are probably going to try to get some pkgconf support |
35 |
> directly into gcc, in form of '-something libfoo' to make it grab |
36 |
> everything magically, I think. |
37 |
|
38 |
if gcc itself runs `pkg-config` to look up libraries from other |
39 |
packages, then we can add it to DEPEND, but if that's not currently |
40 |
the case, the dependency doesn't make sense. |
41 |
-mike |