Danny Milosavljevic <dan...@scratchpost.org> skribis: > Hi Ludo, > > On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 23:22:32 +0100 > l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > >> Is it necessary? It might be a case where picking whatever’s in $PATH >> (“late binding”) is good enough; for instance, ‘gcc’ picks ‘ld’ from >> $PATH, and that’s fine. > > I don't know. What's the policy for pkg-config in general? > > I did it that way now because > > (1) pkg-config is not a native-input of anything D - so if the user didn't > install pkg-config into his profile by chance, the build of some D packages > will fail. > (2) pkg-config itself is very seldomly updated so it doesn't matter if dub > pins it to one specific version - that would even be what I would expect to > happen. > > I'm fine with adding it someway else (especially if it's the same way it's > usually added). > > So either > > (a) dub needs it as input (like this patch would do) or > (b) every D package needs it as native-input (maybe the build system would > auto-add it as native-input to every D package - like it does add ldc and dub) > > - otherwise it will break.
I think ‘dub-build-system’ could add it as an implicit input, much like ‘gnu-build-system’ adds binutils as an implicit input. Or we could simply let people add pkg-config as an input when it’s necessary, just like we do for ‘gnu-build-system’ packages. Thoughts? Ludo’.