Avoid pkg-config, it's very Linux and drags in a ton of dependencies
(most of the time, never required, but that's the way it goes with
everyone's packaging system of choice). A cmake variable would be
preferred, imo (similar to the cmake boost version foo). -sc
So let's make pkg-config opt-in?
Totally, pkg-config is useful goodness. Use it if it's there, but not
make it the primary or only way.
What ton of dependencies are you referring to?
At a minimum it currently requires the following to build (and their
subsequent dependencies):
gettext-0.17_1 gmake-3.81_3 libiconv-1.13.1
How's it linuxy? Do you mean that it's not convenient on non-unix?
pkgconfig has a tendency to suck in other gnome projects due to its
gnome lineage. Ugh.
pkg-config is quite useful on linux distributions. I largely prefer
using
pkg-config over going back to having a gazillion foo-config binaries.
I get the value of pkg-config, not arguing against it, just pointing
out that we have the necessary tools in place with cmake and that
cmake is well suited for solving this problem without adding
additional dependencies. :)
--
Sean Chittenden
s...@chittenden.org
_______________________________________________
Boost-cmake mailing list
Boost-cmake@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-cmake
