rawhide report: 20070912 changes
billcrawford1970 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 14 15:29:07 UTC 2007
On 13/09/2007, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin <at> redhat.com> writes:
> > Forgive me for wading in here, but upstream *has* to be where .pc files
> > show up, and if they don't show up there, we absolutely shouldn't be
> > adding them to binary packages. I believe this very strongly.
> But there are actually cases where .pc files are being added in Fedora
> packages, for reasons such as the upstream foo-config script not being
> multilib-safe (so it gets replaced with multilibbed .pc files and a wrapper
> foo-config script which just calls pkgconfig). There are also other reasons for
> adding .pc files in the distribution.
I think Nalin nailed the salient point: if the upstream doesn't ship a
.pc, then packages building against it shouldn't be relying on there
being one. I'll agree it's a PITA that upstream won't but that's a
completely different issue. In the meantime, Ralf's right, whether
anyone thinks he is being brusque or not.
More information about the fedora-devel-list