Although pkg-config is useful in some cases, I agree with others' negative evaluation against the idea to builtin pkg-config support of autoconf. I want autoconf to keep the library detection without pkg-config. On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 09:48:30 +0800 Tim Post <echo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >I have experienced many issues using pkg-config. Most of the issues >stemmed from users compiling and installing their own libraries, where >one (or more) of the following happens: The most popular scenario I think is: the pkg-config itself is bundled to the system (/usr/bin/pkg-config etc) but the users install their own libraries to non-system directory (e.g. /usr/local/xxx), and the users slipped to set PKG_CONFIG_PATH manually. >* Their custom built library is not used, the system's is. Indeed. It might be popular when default pkg-config prefix is differnt from the prefix that users install their own libraries. Have you experienced the troubles that pkg-config in configure process detects the correct location of custom built library but the system's is used in building process? >* pkg-config did not locate an installed library, due to the library not >installing the files that pkg-config needs to work I'm not sure if this trouble is popular. It sounds as if the author of Makefile.in (or Makefile.am) slipped to add (or break) appropriate target to install xxx.pc files, or install to wrong directory that pkg-config does not search. >Additionally, you will encounter additional problems on systems ~3 years >old, of which many are still in production. Indeed. Regards, mpsuzuki _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
