On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 12:28 +1100, Russell Shaw wrote: > William Pursell wrote: > > Alfred M. Szmidt wrote: > >> pkg-config is broken because it checks for the existance of libraries, > >> and not for the features that are required for the program to run. > >> > > > > It does not even check for the existence of libraries. > > It checks for the existence of a .pc file and assumes > > that the user (or administrator) has supplied the correct > > information. > > It would be useful to have a note in the autoconf manual about > pkg-config, why it exists, and what problems it has. I've wondered > for years about it, and have used it a bit. I haven't found any > authoritive discussion about it other than random posts if one > gets lucky. I might know a bit more now, but a lot of others > don't. I still don't know why pkg-config exists, except that > it seems to avoid autoconfery, which many don't grok. If you are writing a script to install a bunch of things on dissimilar systems that you _know_ support pkg-config (and well), its a great tool and very useful to system administrators. The question is if its capable enough to assist in configuring a sane build. In many cases, it is not, unless the software is written for specific, modern systems. I don't claim to be authoritative on the topic, however. I'm just someone who ran into a bit of frustration while attempting to use it. Cheers, --Tim -- Monkey + Typewriter = Echoreply ( http://echoreply.us ) _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
