Re: Box2D: providing .pc files even if upstream does not?
The idea, as far as I understood, is keeping everything as it is, but
renaming box2d.pc to debian-box2d.pc
That should be acceptable, imo
Miry
2014-03-03 20:15 GMT+01:00 Markus Koschany <apo@gambaru.de>:
> On 03.03.2014 10:18, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
>> On 01/03/2014 16:48, Miriam Ruiz wrote:
>>> As the person who added the .pc file to our package, I strongly
>>> support having it in there even if upstream doesn't support it. I
>>> think it provides enough benefits for those of us who prefer using
>>> pkg-config in our building systems, and it doesn't have any drawbacks:
>>> if you don't want to use it, you can safely ignore it.
>>
>> naïve question: can you get the advantages of .pc for building this
>> package by having it in the source but not distributing it in a binary
>> package? Or, alternatively, using a debian-prefix for the package name?
>
> I think this is a binary decision. The .pc files are only useful if they
> are shipped in the corresponding -dev package, so I fear it's not
> possible to do justice to everybody.
>
> Since I couldn't find much information about similar situations, I
> thought I'd better check with the list before I'm going to upload
> something. It seems the majority is mildly in favor, some even fiercely,
> to support pkg-config. :)
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Reply to: