On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:58:47PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 22:12 +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:12:45PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 02:09:40PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I would say they are making it very inconvenient, but still not
forcing you. Push comes to shove, you can still build depend on a
specific version, and use an explicit -L.
That is correct, of course. But if you're
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:54:32PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:02:20PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
How is this different with _any_ dependency on the system? Do you
suggest that iceweasel should drop its libgtk dependency, because users
might want to use their own
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:17:34 +0200, Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 01:44:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during
build?
How does the library say that? Why can't I just have gcc -o baz
baz.c -lfoo
* Neil Williams
| That is an example of a library including pkg-config into the library
| API. Changing that behaviour (dropping the script) means a SONAME bump.
No, changing an API without changing the ABI does not mean a SONAME
bump. SONAMEs are for ABIs, not APIs and one can change without
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:58:44 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
* Manoj Srivastava
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:15:53 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
How does the
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 07:57:00PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 07:15:53PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
But the library can't say foo must come from a Debian
This one time, at band camp, Goswin von Brederlow said:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
Which package is this?
The libarry does not use foo, only the user, so no depends?
Or idoes forcing users to use foo make foo part of the
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 01:44:55AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
How does the library say that? Why can't I just have gcc -o baz baz.c
-lfoo
How can the library make that not work?
By not shipping the libraries
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 07:58:44AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Yes, in the simple case, you can just do this. In the more complex
case (which upstream might want to cater for), you need to use
pkg-config.
No. Even in this case, I _don't_ need to use pkg-config. I just should
be able to
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:02:20PM +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
How is this different with _any_ dependency on the system? Do you
suggest that iceweasel should drop its libgtk dependency, because users
might want to use their own compiled version of it?
iceweasel _uses_ libgtk. A -dev package
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 07:21:15PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
According to the suggested definition, if a package using this library
chooses to use foo-config, it doesn't call pkg-config directly (and it
may not call it at all, this depends on the inner workings of
foo-config).
During
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 07:58:44AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
Yes, in the simple case, you can just do this. In the more complex
case (which upstream might want to cater for), you need to use
pkg-config.
No. Even in this case, I _don't_ need to
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Hendrik Sattler
| Am Samstag 05 April 2008 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
| Whoever develops software based on libbar will have to have a call to
| pkg-config somewhere in their build process so they should depend on
| pkg-config.
|
| _If_ they
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 09:33 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That depends on the library you are linking against. I, as an library
author is free to say «the only supported way to use my gargleblaster
library is through the
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS and / or
FOO_CFLAGS by the use of pkg-config*, pkg-config becomes part of the API
of that library and the -dev package of
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS and / or
FOO_CFLAGS by the use of pkg-config*, pkg-config becomes part of the API
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 19:15 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
Gabor Gombas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS and / or
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 07:15:53PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
But the library can't say foo must come from a Debian package. What if
I have my local replacement? Why should I be forced to
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 19:57 +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 07:15:53PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
But the library can't say foo must come from a Debian package. What
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 17:23 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote:
First of all, I skipped a large part of this thread, so I'm sorry if
this has come up before.
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 03:53:03PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
And by this definition, it is the package _invoking_ pkg-config that
should
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:12:45PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS and / or
FOO_CFLAGS by the use of pkg-config*,
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:15:53 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
You are missing the point.
What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
How does the library say that? Why can't I just have
gcc -o baz baz.c -lfoo
How can the library
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 22:12 +0200, Jakob Bohm wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:12:45PM +0200, Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
What about these clauses as a Policy amendment?
1. If a library *only supports the retrieval of FOO_LIBS
* Manoj Srivastava
| On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:15:53 +0200, Goswin von Brederlow
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
|
| You are missing the point.
|
| What if the library says You must call /usr/bin/foo during build?
|
| How does the library say that? Why can't I just have
| gcc -o baz baz.c
On Mon, 2008-04-07 at 22:12 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Any package that wants to use .pc files during its build is going to invoke
pkg-config directly, and changing your -dev package to recommend a different
means of linking to the library won't cause this reference to disappear.
That's a
* Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080407 20:19]:
Here I have to contradict. No -dev package should ever depend on a
compiler or linker, even if that tool was not already in
build-essentials.
Can you provide some rationale for this assertion? I can see why
one might not tie
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 06:49:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
In this case, again, if my dev package requires a tool not in
build depends now, I should declare it, for the same reason -- the next
upload of the dev package might have different tools, or eliminate
tools -- and
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 08:47:38AM +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
It's also a lot of packages - does such a dependency ever become
inferred by other packages? It probably shouldn't, for your reasons
above, so this would appear to be a case for a lintian check.
If ./configure exists and calls
I demand that Gabor Gombas may or may not have written...
[snip]
Also, if it's the -dev package that depends on the tool and the tool
changes, then the users will get worse error messages.
Unless the -dev package has a wrapper for that tool, e.g. for backward
compatibility reasons. xine-config
On Sun, Apr 06, 2008 at 03:18:58PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The use case here are people downloading a tarball and building that.
These people are going to use a prebuilt configure script and expect the
* Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080407 10:16]:
It's not the dev package's responsibility to ensure gcc/g++/binutils
are installed, I beleive the same applies to pkg-config.
It sounds like you're suggesting to add pkg-config to build-essential?
Because that's the reason that the -dev
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 18:20:56 +0200, Bernhard R Link [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
* Bas Wijnen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080407 10:16]:
It's not the dev package's responsibility to ensure
gcc/g++/binutils are installed, I beleive the same applies to
pkg-config.
It sounds like you're suggesting to
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 01:14:50PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 18:20:56 +0200, Bernhard R Link [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Here I have to contradict. No -dev package should ever depend on a
compiler or linker, even if that tool was not already in
build-essentials.
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 23:21:51 +0200, Andreas Bombe [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 01:14:50PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008 18:20:56 +0200, Bernhard R Link
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Here I have to contradict. No -dev package should ever depend on a
compiler
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 06:49:24PM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I can't speak for Bernhard of course, but my opinion is that such
dependencies of any sort are redundant. The development packages are
not usable by themselves, they are used by programs. If it's a dev
package for a C
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The use case here are people downloading a tarball and building that.
These people are going to use a prebuilt configure script and expect the
library to be found by it if the -dev package is installed.
Then the
* Simon Richter
| Hi,
|
| Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev
| and uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for
| libbar.
|
| Now is it the foo package's or the libbar-dev package's duty to
| provide the dependency on pkg-config?
|
|
Am Samstag 05 April 2008 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
Whoever develops software based on libbar will have to have a call to
pkg-config somewhere in their build process so they should depend on
pkg-config.
_If_ they do. Please consider the possibility that an application developer
links to libbar
* Hendrik Sattler
| Am Samstag 05 April 2008 schrieb Tollef Fog Heen:
| Whoever develops software based on libbar will have to have a call to
| pkg-config somewhere in their build process so they should depend on
| pkg-config.
|
| _If_ they do. Please consider the possibility that an
On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 04:52:29PM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
That depends on the library you are linking against. I, as an library
author is free to say «the only supported way to use my gargleblaster
library is through the I_CAN_HAS_GARGELBLASTER autoconf macro» (which
then proceeds to set
* Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [080405 16:53]:
That depends on the library you are linking against. I, as an library
author is free to say «the only supported way to use my gargleblaster
library is through the I_CAN_HAS_GARGELBLASTER autoconf macro» (which
then proceeds to set
Hi,
On Sat, 2008-04-05 at 15:30 +, brian m. carlson wrote:
I think it is safe to say that Debian supports passing the
appropriate
command line arguments without using pkg-config, even if upstream
does
not. At least that seems to be my experience.
Yes, but people depending on this
Simon Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev and
uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for libbar.
Now is it the foo package's or the libbar-dev package's duty to provide
the dependency on pkg-config?
Disagreeing
Le Sunday 06 April 2008 00:08:43 Roger Leigh, vous avez écrit :
The foo package's build dependencies are only relevant when building the
foo package. For someone who develops software based on libbar, it is
not obvious that foo's build dependencies are required.
As an upstream, I include a
Hi,
| The foo package's build dependencies are only relevant when building
| the foo package. For someone who develops software based on libbar,
| it is not obvious that foo's build dependencies are required.
Whoever develops software based on libbar will have to have a call to
pkg-config
Hi,
Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev and
uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for libbar.
Now is it the foo package's or the libbar-dev package's duty to provide
the dependency on pkg-config?
Disagreeing with the others: It is the -dev
On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 12:38:34AM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev and
uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for libbar.
Now is it the foo package's or the libbar-dev package's duty to provide
the
Hi,
The foo package's build dependencies are only relevant when building the
foo package. For someone who develops software based on libbar, it is
not obvious that foo's build dependencies are required.
Except that a -dev package can be perfectly functional without
pkg-config. So, in
This one time, at band camp, Simon Richter said:
Hi,
The foo package's build dependencies are only relevant when building the
foo package. For someone who develops software based on libbar, it is
not obvious that foo's build dependencies are required.
Except that a -dev package can
On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 14:09:09 +0100, Fabian Greffrath wrote:
Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev and
uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for libbar.
Now is it the foo package's or the libbar-dev package's duty to provide
the dependency on
This one time, at band camp, Fabian Greffrath said:
Dear all,
well, the subject line allready asks the question.
Consider there's a package foo which is built against libbar-dev and
uses pkg-config to obtain the necessary CFLAGS and LIBS for libbar.
Now is it the foo package's or the
52 matches
Mail list logo
