Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659756 Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(rc040203@freenet. | |de) | --- Comment #14 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-12-14 20:17:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) > (In reply to comment #11) > > (In reply to comment #10) > > > > > about .pc files, and the Package Review Guidelines say: > > > > > > SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and > > > this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. > > > A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not > > > installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. > > > > That's not my point. My point is FPC discussed whether packages shipping a > > %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/*.pc should own the %{_libdir}/pkgconfig directory. > > > > Unfortunately I can't find a trace of this discussion, ATM > > Doesn't this happen implicitly? No. > The pkgconfig auto-provs/reqs generate a provide for the shipped .pc file(s) > and a require for /usr/bin/pkg-config; This is a bug - A package which provides a *.pc does _not_ necessarily have to require /usr/bin/pkg-config but only has to have %{_libdir}/pkgconfig owned. > this comes from the pkgconfig package, > which owns the %{_libdir}/pkgconfig directory. It's the old "plugins" vs. "dependency" issue. A package which provides an "add-on" to suport a tool, doesn't not mean this package has to depend on this tool. Wrt. libraries: Libraries are well usable without pkg-config. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review