On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, David Dawes wrote: >>> That some libs have pkg-config support shouldn't be seen as indicative >>> of anything in particular. All of them are distributed separately >>> by their primary author, which isn't true of the other libs in the >>> XFree86 source tree. It's likely that all of them will be moved to the >>> xc/extras tree along with most other externally maintained components >>> in the XFree86 source tree. >> >>If these libs provide the pkg-config functionality, it would be much easier >>for autotooled programs to find the libs and compiler options needed to >>compile themselves. If all libs are pkg-config'd it would allow the >>programs to take advantage of the pkg-config for any program. It will not >>hurt any of the current ways that X is currently supported. It will just >>add the option for programs to use pkg-config. > >I can only recall one case in my own experience where an autotooled >program had a problem concerning X-related libs. Ironically those were >exactly the libs that had pkgconfig support. The autotool and pkgconfig >combination didn't know where to look for the needed .pc files.
I've experienced this as well. It's basically due to most (perhaps all) OS distributions out there that ship pkg-config, not having /usr/X11R6/lib/pkg-config in the default pkg-config path, which is where XFree86 installs the pkg-config files by default, making them somewhat useless on most systems without reconfiguring the local pkg-config installation. We move the XFree86 supplied .pc files into /usr/lib/pkgconfig/ where the default pkgconfig configuration can find them. A better fix would be either making XFree86 install them into /usr/lib/pkg-config by default, or making the default configuration file for pkgconfig contain the X11 pkgconfig directory. Thoughts? -- Mike A. Harris _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
