[Rpm-maint] [rpm-software-management/rpm] scripts/pkgconfigdeps.sh fixes (#411)

[Neal Gompa (ニール・ゴンパ)]

> Static libraries do not exist in most of the distributions and it is not the assumption.

You do know that not every distribution subpackages out static link libraries, right? Fedora does it, but plenty don't. For example, Debian doesn't (yes, I know Debian doesn't use RPM, but you said _all_ Linux distributions).

> Nevertheless, this workaround is not needed as current rpm-build package requires pkgconfig.

Please tell me you're not making a judgment like this solely on Fedora's `rpm-build` package and that everyone packages the software they build? Also, this dep generator specifically pulls it `/usr/bin/pkg-config`, the tool used to utilize these. This is no different than the case of `<foo>-config` binaries from really old libraries. It's entirely possible to install devel subpackages without `rpm-build` being present on the system, precisely so that someone can do development against them...

That said, the top three build systems for software packaged as RPM all prefer and will use `pkg-config` to find things if `/usr/bin/pkg-config` is available:

* CMake
* Meson
* Autotools

And things fail in very strange ways when it's not there. Somehow you missed the huge change where most things now _do_ ship and use pc files via `pkg-config` to build software.

And prior to the dep generator automatically adding it, it was policy in most distributions to add it for _every_ package that ships `pkg-config` files to both BR and Req `/usr/bin/pkg-config`, so that dep generation works and that people can use it properly.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/411#issuecomment-372157679
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rpm.org/pipermail/rpm-maint/attachments/20180311/997ebef0/attachment.html>