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 the
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 u
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 P
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
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_
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).
>
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 p
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 s
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 o
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 D
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 buil
* 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 t
* 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
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 retrieva
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 librar
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, 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
> > >
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 p
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
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_LIB
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 o
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 Build-Depend on it, not the package that happens to ship
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 16:12 +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*, pkg-con
* Goswin von Brederlow
| I would go one step further. Imho libraries with *.pc files should say
| "the only supported way to use this lib is by using pkg-config".
I would not recommend that, as pkg-config upstream.
| > | Putting pkg-config on Recommends of Suggests of every -dev packages
| > |
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
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 I_CAN_HAS
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.
> |
> |
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-confi
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
* 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
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
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
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
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 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
* 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 -de
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
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 conf
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-conf
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 in
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?
>
>
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
* 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 GARGL
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
* 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 appli
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 libba
* 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?
|
| Disag
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 -de
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
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
> >
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 p
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
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
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 libbar-dev package's duty to provide
the dependency on pkg-conf
56 matches
Mail list logo
