Quoting Daniel Stone (2017-10-06 03:28:48) > Hi, > > On 5 October 2017 at 22:22, Dylan Baker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Quoting Eric Anholt (2017-10-05 12:43:47) > >> Dylan Baker <[email protected]> writes: > >> > +install_headers('main/gbm.h') > >> > + > >> > +pkg.generate( > >> > + name : 'gbm', > >> > + filebase : 'gbm', > >> > + description : 'Mesa gbm library', > >> > + version : meson.project_version(), > >> > + libraries : libgbm, > >> > + #libraries_private : [dep_dl], # FIXME: autotools lists this a > >> > incomplete > >> > >> Is there a reason this is commented out? > > > > Just that it doesn't accept libraries, only strings. I'll add the string > > until > > we can get the issue resolved upstream. > > Would it not be easier, at least for now, to just use configure_file() > to build the pkg-config files from the .pc.in we use for autotools? It > would help avoid desynchronisation between the two systems, and means > we don't have to route around Meson's pkg-config module being ... not > quite the best. > > Cheers, > Daniel
I don't know that it really is going to change much, the information that is duplicated between them is unlikely to change (the name and description are the only things hardcoded). And the rest would require the same information in string form (Requires.private, Libs.private). I don't have a strong opinion at the moment one way or the other (although I started writing patches last night to make the pkgconfig interface better), but I think the work in the end is equal whichever path we take. Dylan
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
