On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 05:45:27PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le dimanche 09 décembre 2007 à 15:44 -0800, Steve Langasek a écrit : > > > For example, pkg-config --libs gtk+-x11-2.0 will return, among others, > > > -lglib-2.0 and -lm. And this is perfectly intentional.
> > Just because it's intentional doesn't mean it isn't absurd and wrong. > It may be absurd, but I don’t think it is wrong. > > No, what can be done is to fix upstream's broken declaration that 'you can > > assume glib functions are available when doing "#include <gtk/gtk.h>"'. It > > doesn't follow that just because this works in practice, it should be a > > supported usage. > When many of the types used by GTK+ are those provided by GLib, it > sounds wrong to ask developers to include the GLib headers to have these > types available. Well, that part is fairly reasonable, I admit. What isn't reasonable is to go from "including gtk.h lets you use glib types" to "calling pkg-config --libs gtk+-2.0 lets you invoke glib functions". Yes, including gtk.h is always going to be sufficient, in practice, to get the glib types; but a) includes != pkg-config, b) since it isn't implied there really is no obligation to support such an expectation wrt pkg-config use, aside from upstream's apparent commitment to compatibility with foolishly-assembled build systems. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]