Hi Chris, On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 08:09:20PM +0000, Chris Lamb wrote: > > https://anonscm.debian.org/git/lintian/lintian.git/commit/?id=70c81c7f1c9e96c8109988efe8aeca7ed17f122a > > Let me know if you have any suggestions :)
Yes, I do. The tag description suggests that pkg-config could have been invoked directly. While that is a common way to fail cross compilation, the pattern does not check that other case. My original description suggested using another pattern (\$\(|`)pkg-config for that other case matching the second paragraph of the tag description. To see just how common this is, check: https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=path%3Aconfigure%5C.%5Bai%5D%5Bcn%5D+%28%5C%24%5C%28%7C%60%29pkg-config I think you should remove the second paragraph from the description. Flagging is probably better done in a separate tag (both of which can and sometimes do happen in the same configure.ac). I also wonder what the best advise actually is. Of course using PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG is "best" in a sense, but it behaves subtly different. The present use of AC_PATH_PROG gives choice of the variable name and the value-for-absence to the user while the standard macro will simply use PKG_CONFIG and an empty value. A number of scripts check things like test "$PKG_CONFIG" = no and that would break when switching the macro. On the other hand, using AC_PATH_TOOL in place of AC_PATH_PROG is mostly risk-less, because it takes the very same arguments and behaves in the same way (except for prepending $ac_tool_prefix). So the better solution certainly is PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG, but the riskless one certainly is AC_PATH_TOOL. What are your thoughts here? Helmut