On 12/05/15 12:24, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>
> But if you think it's a hack, I'll keep on feeling that using pkg-config
> for libs is slightly more work than when relying on include/lib paths
> (except for the cases with libraries with transitive dependencies where
> pkg-config is a must), for my use cases and workflows.
And that is a royal pain if you are building something on top of libav
on custom paths since you have to set twice the library and include
paths AND pass them over the external build system.
Having just pkg-config would simplify a lot the end-user life since then
all the custom paths would be available through pkg-config inheritance.
This became even more apparent with a report from a linuxbrew user (that
prompted me to update the Platform documentation to mention that you
have to set both).
Then he kindly made me notice that then the pkg-config for libav would
be broken.
In short, I'd spend even more time to make sure that everything gets
standardized to pkg-config in the medium/short term.
lu
PS: no storing the extra-{ld,c}flags in the libav pkgconfig is not
better solution since it is too dangerous =/
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
