ports/69093: [patch] devel/pkgconfig does not search for .pc files in libdir/pkgconfig

[Pav Lucistnik]

The following reply was made to PR ports/69093; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Pav Lucistnik <pav at FreeBSD.org>
To: Konstantin Oznobihin <bork at rsu.ru>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit at FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/69093: [patch] devel/pkgconfig does not search for .pc
	files in libdir/pkgconfig
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 18:22:34 +0200

 --=-fF/cVJYu8MdwqoqcpmvV
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 V =E8t, 15. 07. 2004 v 18:13, Konstantin Oznobihin p=ED=B9e:
 
 > > > > Depends on point of view. You call it a bug, we call it a feature. =
 It
 > > > > was deliberately added to our port of pkgconfig three years ago. It=
  cost
 > > > > us a lot of effort to keep up with it since. It help pkgconfig to
 > > > > conform to FreeBSD hierarchy rules, which say "only shared binary f=
 iles
 > > > > under lib/, indirectly executed binaries under libexec/, non-execut=
 able
 > > > > stuff under libdata/". I'm not sure we want to drop this feature, t=
 aking
 > > > > the effort we put into it in past.
 > > >=20
 > > > I am definitely not want you to drop this feature. As you can see my
 > > > patch just adds ${PREFIX}/lib to the existing list of directories. I
 > > > agree that when it is possible we should make ports conform with Free=
 BSD
 > > > rules. Also, I think that looking for things other than shared librar=
 ies
 > > > in lib would not be a big violation of FreeBSD rules, especially if t=
 his
 > > > behavior complies with rules of the paticular software.
 > >=20
 > > Existing behavior gives us a lever to force people to patch their ports
 > > and conform to hierarchy. If we would allow both /lib and /libdata, how
 > > many port maintainers do you think would bother to patch lib->libdata?
 > >=20
 > > Changing the location of .pc file is usually a one-line patch to
 > > Makefile.in
 
 > Well, if it is just a one-line patch then I think that most of
 > maintainers first or last will done it. I want to notice however that
 > impossibility to use pkgconfig does not creates any problems to the
 > maintainers of such ports, this situation hinders those who rely on them
 > (e.g. lang/ruby18 which depends on openssl).
 
 OpenSSL is special, because it's part of base system. OpenSSL in base
 does not come with .pc file at all! And there is a special OpenSSL
 framework in ports, hidden behind USE_OPENSSL knob, which account for
 various combinations of base and port OpenSSL.
 
 I agree that security/openssl port should install openssl.pc into
 libdata/pkgconfig, and I believe dinoex at FreeBSD.org (maintainer of
 openssl port) will welcome and apply patches in this regard.
 
 --=20
 Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
               <pav at FreeBSD.org>
 
 Thank God we're theoretical physicists so we don't have to get our
 hands dirty with particle accelerators and other heavy machinery.
 
 --=-fF/cVJYu8MdwqoqcpmvV
 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
 Content-Description: Toto je =?iso-8859-2?Q?digit=E1ln=EC?=
 	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_podepsan=E1?= =?iso-8859-2?Q?_=E8=E1st?=
 	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?_zpr=E1vy?=
 
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)
 
 iD8DBQBA9q9KntdYP8FOsoIRApInAJ92BFrSxA1K+Yhnexy+Ni2P/p0T/QCgrFOT
 nQ3DnRZuJgH0A8JaaP7w0+c=
 =emF/
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 --=-fF/cVJYu8MdwqoqcpmvV--