Rich Freeman: > On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Tom Wijsman <tom...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> On Fri, 09 May 2014 20:57:29 +0100 >> Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >>> I was wondering, is there a good reason we keep our own pkgconfig >>> files instead of communicating that to upstream and resolve that >>> properly? >> >> Yes, when your "instead of ..." is not an option. >> >>> What other distributions do? Or are we a special case and >>> we need our own pc files? >> >> No, see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509392#c23 which reads: >> >> "You do realize that out of five distros (Fedora, Debian, >> Slackware, SuSe, Mandriva) I checked five ship a .pc file?" by mabi. > > I think fixing upstream is a no-brainer. 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. > > When the only issue is maintainer laziness I could see fixing that in > a different way... >
The fact is... missing pkg-config files are in 99% of the cases all fixable by fixing the build systems of packages that assume those pkg-config files... more specific: provide a fallback (I gave enough links for that in the reponse to the council agenda mail). This improves portability overall, for upstream, for us, for other distros and for random users.
