On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:25:58 +0000 Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> wrote: > What did you conclude about cross-pkgconfig > Should we be using --host <triplet> or <triplet>-pkg-config to call it > in 'cross-mode'? (Was this meant to go to the bug report or to me direct rather than the list?) --host allows just a single package to be modified (pkg-config) and then all packages will gain cross support just using autoreconf. i.e. we can do an autoreconf ourselves but once this version of pkg-config is in widespread usage in upstream teams, every package gains cross support from pkg-config at each new upstream release. Much higher level, much higher impact, many more people doing the work - 99% of them completely unaware that the work is being done at all. Zero changes required by any upstream team - it JustWorks.tm autotools doesn't need to support <triplet>-pkg-config - pkg-config with the --host change provides an updated m4 macro which works for all architectures which can be passed to ./configure. <triplet>-pkg-config needs to be created for every new arch. > I read your contributions to the bugreport > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=217902#28 > but I'm afraid I wasn't really able to grok what's going on. The patch modifies the pkg-config m4 macro which, if accepted, would become embedded into every new upstream autotools package at the first upstream release to use this version. Then, when cross-compiling, pkg-config is called using the --host argument to look in the relevant location. The only problem comes when upstreams call pkg-config directly instead of using the PKG_CHECK_MODULES macro. These upstreams would need modifications to either use the macro or use --host. > That mentiond ideas from upstream wiki but I can't actually find that. > Do you have a URL for what you are reffering to? http://pkg-config.freedesktop.org/wiki/CrossCompileProposal -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpo6o0CFil5N.pgp
Description: PGP signature