Hi, On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 08:53:49 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen <tfh...@err.no> wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 22:20:11 +0200, Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de> wrote: > > > I am not sure whether reassigning the bug to mingw-w64-tools is the best > > > way to get a quick (intermediate) solution. If it helps, I have no > > > objection, although I thought that patching the pkg-config package would > > > be easier to fix that special issue. > > > > Oh well, I suppose mingw-w64-tools *is* the right place to deal with > > this, if pkg-config is only intended to handle Debian architectures. If > > you do reassign the bug, please upgrade it to serious and I’ll try to get > > a fix ready in time for Buster. > > The crosswrapper in pkg-config does require that the architecture is > known to dpkg, yes. The /usr/bin/*-pkg-config namespace is managed by > the pkg-config dpkg hook, so other tools should coordinate with > pkg-config if they want to work within that area. (I'm not even sure > what the pkg-config directory for i686-w64-mingw32 and > x86_64-w64-mingw32 should be.)
The MinGW-w64 packages use traditional cross-compilation paths,
so the pkg-config directory /usr/{i686,x86-64}-w64-mingw32/lib/pkgconfig.
(Not FHS-compliant, I know, but they can’t “own” the multiarch paths until
their architectures are defined in dpkg.)
I noticed that the pkg-config hook is very careful to only
touch /usr/bin/*-pkg-config links it owns. Would it be acceptable to continue
shipping MinGW-w64 pkg-config instances there? Not using crosswrapper, of
course, but a MinGW-w64-hosted implementation.
Regards,
Stephen
pgpw5j_tJfgPV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
