Re: RFC: Rules for distro-friendly packages
Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> No. I don't believe it's very important or at all necessary, and since
> I don't use pkg-config myself and don't plan to start, it's not
> particularly important. While I'll probably do something about it
> eventually when I have some free time, it's very low on my priority
> list. I completely disagree with any statement about upstream build
> practices that require it.
This and some of the other things that I said about pkg-config on this
thread were way too strong, and I want to generally apologize to the
mailing list readers and specifically to all the people who have been
working on pkg-config. I got defensive and annoyed for reasons that
really weren't justified, and reacted by being very negative about
software that didn't deserve it.
Thank you very much to those who talked me through my badly expressed
opinions on IRC with far more patience than they deserved.
I'm still not convinced that I want to use pkg-config as part of the build
process of my software, and there are a few things (like the ease of doing
version comparisons instead of feature checks) that I don't particularly
like about how it works, but it certainly has a place. It is, for
example, a much better replacement for all the incompatible *-config
The next releases of my various library packages will all ship pkg-config
*.pc files. I just pushed the deltas for remctl, since it was an easy
initial testing case.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>