On 10/05/14 12:39, Markos Chandras wrote: > On 05/10/2014 07:31 AM, Alexandre Rostovtsev wrote: >> On Sat, 2014-05-10 at 13:50 +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: >>> On 10 May 2014 04:34, Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>> On 05/09/2014 09:32 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:15:58 -0400 >>>>> Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer. >>>>> It indeed is, this is the goal; you can force them in multiple ways, >>>>> some of which can be found on the Lua bug and previous discussion(s). >>>>> >>>>>> The controversy only exists when upstream refuses to cooperate (which >>>>>> seems to be the case when we're one of six distros patching it). If >>>>>> there are other situations where we supply our own files please speak >>>>>> up. >>>>> Not that I know of; the refusal to cooperate is what this is all about, >>>>> see my last response to hwoarang before this mail for a short summary. >>>>> Though, I think that the Lua maintainers can explain all the details... >>>>> >>>>>> When the only issue is maintainer laziness I could see fixing that in >>>>>> a different way... >>>>> It has always been an issue; we could always use more manpower, ... >>>>> >>>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Contributing_to_Gentoo >>>>> >>>> Well to me it feels that gentoo specific .pc files is a similar problem >>>> to any other patch that affects upstream code in order to make the >>>> package compatible with gentoo. Some people may consider downstream pc >>>> files more dangerous because reverse deps are affected. But really, if >>>> there is no other alternative, we shouldn't be treating this as a >>>> special case. We patch upstream packages all the time after all >>> Exactly. I don't understand why this is an issue at all. Obviously, >>> if upstream does not ship a .pc file or ships a broken one, we try >>> to work with upstream to get it fixed on their end. If they are >>> uncooperative, we fix it on our end. >> Adding a pkgconfig file is a bit of a special case. Some distros have a >> habit of renaming and creating .pc files for various libraries. > Isn't this the same thing? If Debian creates/renames upstream pc files, > and you use Debian as a development box, you have the same problem: > Develop software which is not portable across distros.
Say, a package XYZ makes use of xyz.pc and it's distribution specific, then you switch to a distribution that also ships XYZ but without pkg-config file, you can simply... export FOOBAR_LIBS="-lfoo" export FOOBAR_CFLAGS="-I/usr/include/foo" ./configure make make install ...as pkg-config allows using it without the .pc files by design. This is an non-issue. - Samuli
