Subject: Re: pkg-config vs. buildlink3
To: Juan RP <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Johnny C. Lam <jlam@NetBSD.org>
Date: 04/20/2005 15:27:12
Juan RP wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:03:24 -0400
> Johnny Lam <jlam@NetBSD.org> wrote:
>>This changes pkgsrc's pkgconfig in ways that are incompatible with the
>>stock pkgconfig. Could we instead simply make the code match the
>>documentation by implementing PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR?
> Yes, we could... but PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR isn't used anymore by pkg-config.
> If they changed to use PKG_CONFIG_PATH, why we shouldn't do the same?
But elsewhere in this thread, it is said that the pkgconfig manpage does
document a PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR, but it is nowhere present in the code.
Implementing PKG_CONFIG_LIBDIR is just fixing the code. Changing the
semantics of PKG_CONFIG_PATH is something different. From the
documentation, it appears that PKG_CONFIG_PATH is meant to be a search
path prepended to the compiled-in path. Your proposed modification to
make PKG_CONFIG_PATH replace it altogether would likely break software
that relied on the documented behaviour of PKG_CONFIG_PATH.
-- Johnny Lam <jlam@NetBSD.org>