Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Hendrik Sattler
Am Donnerstag 28 September 2006 21:14 schrieb Kurt Roeckx: > Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version > of pkg-config. Interesting but maybe documenting Requires.private would be a good idea? Hint: the manpage only mentions Libs.private, see #341977 #346602. And 9 month

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Mike Hommey
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:40:43PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/28/06, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 > >> -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include > >> -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/incl

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version > >of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 > > Well, then something wierd is going o

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On 9/28/06, Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 > -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include > -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo I don't know what pkg-config is supposed to do, but surely you don't need the freetype2 nor

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Mike Hommey
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version > >of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 > > Well, then somet

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 Well, then something wierd is going on. I have 0.21-1 installed and I get this. This first time is with Requires, the

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Loïc Minier
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > >Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but > >pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which > >is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be > >fixed, then you can start recompiling al

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 04:17:39PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > > >The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires > >as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary > >infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) > > Ok, the reduces the libs

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On 9/28/06, Tollef Fog Heen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Martijn van Oosterhout skrev: > Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but > pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which > is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be > f

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-28 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
Martijn van Oosterhout skrev: Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be fixed, then you can start recompiling all the affected programs.

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Loïc Minier
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006, Josselin Mouette wrote: > for file in $(wildcard debian/$(cdbs_curpkg)/usr/lib/*.la); do \ > sed -i "/dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/" $$file ; \ > done To use this feature, if you use CDBS, simply: include /usr/share/gnome-pkg-tools/1

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Hamish Moffatt
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:23:23PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > >Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag > >to the ld command line? > > Some of it is also pkg-config's fault. For example, anyone using > pkg-config with gtk+2 gets the following: > > # pkg-c

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Josselin Mouette
Le mardi 26 septembre 2006 à 09:36 -0700, Kevin B. McCarty a écrit : > In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs > available on the web page for "problems" and found the libraries that > are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty > offenders, li

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Bernhard R. Link
* Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060926 18:37]: > Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la and .pc > files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they link in. There is also AC_PATH_XTRA, which just adds all X stuff when only few may be needed. Also note that X

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On 9/26/06, Mikhail Gusarov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM> link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kevin B. McCarty
Christian Aichinger wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: >> In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib >> logs available on the web page for "problems" and found the >> libraries that are most often listed as bogus dependencies. > > This

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Christian Aichinger
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag > to the ld command line? As described in the other mails, --as-needed is a hack, and can cause trouble. I've also thought of a debhelper script stipping out u

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Christian Aichinger
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs > available on the web page for "problems" and found the libraries that > are most often listed as bogus dependencies. This seriously rocks. Thanks. Actually th

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: > > In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs > available on the web page for "problems" and found the libraries that > are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty > offenders, li

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > > You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la > KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they > KBM> link in. > > Will this problem disappear i

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Kevin B. McCarty
Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la > KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they > KBM> link in. > > Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag > t

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Bastian Venthur
Mikhail Gusarov wrote: > You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la > KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they > KBM> link in. > > Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag > t

Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]

2006-09-26 Thread Mikhail Gusarov
You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM> Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM> and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM> link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? -- JID: [EMAI