| 1 |
On Monday 30 April 2012 02:16:40 Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:08:34 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sunday 29 April 2012 18:40:00 Jeff Horelick wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > I'd just like to say, i'm also an Atheme project member and I have |
| 5 |
> > > authorisation from nenolod (the primary pkgconf developer) to make |
| 6 |
> > > changes and stuff, so I can upstream any changes necessary to make |
| 7 |
> > > pkgconf work for us. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > that sounds really good. i sent you some patches ;). |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > however, it's missing pkg.m4. any thoughts on that ? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Maybe we should provide it independently in some other package. |
| 14 |
> Considering the implementations are supposed to be compatible, the .m4 |
| 15 |
> file should work fine with all of them. And we'll create same configure |
| 16 |
> files independently of which impl particular user uses. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
i debated that, but i'd rather not split the canonical pkg-config package into |
| 19 |
(quite literally) two files. it makes upgrading dev-util/pkgconfig more of a |
| 20 |
hassle, and having these re-implementations take care of things themselves |
| 21 |
seems to be easier atm. if that ends up not being the case, we can always |
| 22 |
revisit ... the current implementation doesn't preclude splitting. |
| 23 |
-mike |
Archives