On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 08:52:53AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > On Sunday 04 September 2005 7:13 am, Steve Langasek wrote: > > pkg-config and libtool are both tools designed to facilitate portability > > to platforms which have inferior linkers, and in the process they > > duplicate information already provided by ELF libraries on GNU/Linux in > > a manner that makes dependency changes more rigid and fragile. > > http://people.debian.org/~vorlon/dependency-hell/ > Nice presentation but I don't see what you would like upstream to do > to help. *Not* using pkg-config? Obviously there will be some for whom the portability to arcane and broken Unices is important, and there will be those who find the GNOME-style versioned include paths worthwhile, but if you don't fall into one of these two categories, not deploying .pc files that people will subsequently write their applications to depend on is much less painful for Debian. > Once libtool 1.6 is in unstable rather than experimental, then I can use that > - but that won't help that much because the target platform for most of my > code is still FC3 (not my decision). Actually, after that talk was written I found out that the patch in question had *not* been committed to libtool upstream. It is present in the Debian libtool packages, however, including the one in unstable. > I don't mind making a special case for GNU/Linux but not if that > actually only includes Debian. Er, there's nothing Debian-specific about the rationale, and nothing in this that would penalize users of Fedora or other GNU/Linux distros. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature