Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-16 Thread Kalev Lember
On 06/15/2014 11:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote: Since there are sixteen variants of the library, I am providing sixteen corresponding pkg-config files. When another program uses the library, by using pkg-config in their Makefile (or other build system), it will ensure that they are getting the

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-16 Thread Eric Smith
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Kalev Lember kalevlem...@gmail.com wrote: Otherwise it could create a situation where software developed on Fedora relies on .pc files and doesn't work on other distros, and the other way around: software developed on other distros won't use the nice

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-16 Thread Hans de Goede
Hi, On 06/16/2014 08:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: On 06/15/2014 11:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote: Since there are sixteen variants of the library, I am providing sixteen corresponding pkg-config files. When another program uses the library, by using pkg-config in their Makefile (or other build

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-16 Thread drago01
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com wrote: Hi, On 06/16/2014 08:57 AM, Kalev Lember wrote: On 06/15/2014 11:32 PM, Eric Smith wrote: Since there are sixteen variants of the library, I am providing sixteen corresponding pkg-config files. When another program

Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-15 Thread Eric Smith
Because a new version of the Free42 calculator has switched to the Intel decimal floating point library (an implementation of the decimal part of IEEE-754), I'm working on packaging it: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1098820 Intel supplies it as portable code intended to be

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-15 Thread Kevin Kofler
Eric Smith wrote: I don't really understand how this is adding to the API or results in incompatibilities. Do other people think that doing this is a mistake? Would it actually be better for the package not to provide pkg-config files? The reason we do not recommend adding non-upstream

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-15 Thread Eric Smith
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Re: Adding pkg-config not provided by upstream when packaging a library?

2014-06-15 Thread Eric Smith
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote: Eric Smith wrote: I don't really understand how this is adding to the API or results in incompatibilities. Do other people think that doing this is a mistake? Would it actually be better for the package not to