[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Use pkgconfig for dirac libs

Måns Rullgård mans
Thu Oct 23 13:23:46 CEST 2008

Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 23-10-2008 12:52, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> As I said, different.  Additionally, pkgconfig searches according to
>> PKG_CONFIG_PATH (or similar), whilst the linker uses LIBRARY_PATH.
>> If these differ for whatever reason, you'll end up with a mismatch.
> ...

What is that supposed to mean?  That you don't care?

>>>> Furthermore, it is much less work to add a fairly trivial bit of code
>>>> to half a dozen linkers (and pkgconfig only works with gnu tools
>>>> anyway)
>>> and microsoft bad excuse for compiler (aka cl)...
>> Do I look like I care?  I'm talking about the native compilers on
>> various Unix systems and cross-compilers from non-gnu vendors.  These
>> are often much better than gcc.
> fdo has a bugzilla as well (btw which of them isn't compatible with the
> gcc syntax for what is important here?)

GCC has numerous flags that are not compatible with other compilers.  It
is easier to list the ones that *are* compatible across a wide range.
The -D, -E, -I, -L, -O, -U, -c, -g, -l, and -o flags are all standard flags
specified by POSIX, and most compilers seem to support them, even when not
otherwise POSIX compatible.  The standard also includes -s (to produce a
stripped output), but not many compilers implement this (or even use -s
to mean something else).

Examples of common gcc flags *not* supported by other compilers are
all the -f, -m, and -W flags.

>>>> , than it is to modify each and every package ever written to
>>>> use pkgconfig (even if we pretend for a moment that using it wasn't
>>>> associated with severe mental suffering).
>>> s/modify/replace at least 10 lines of cruft per dep with a single one
>>> iterable over a list/
>>> Please spend a bit of time checking...
>> Gentoo has well over 10000 packages.  If we want to add a feature to
>> 10 linkers, it would take 1000 lines of code in each for this task to
>> match that of updating all packages.  I also believe that investing
>> a little more time, even 10 times more would acceptable, upfront in
>> fixing the root problem (static libs not recording dependencies) would
>> mean less work in the longer term.  This gives us 10000 lines of code
>> to implement the new linker feature, which I'm certain is more than
>> enough.  We must also not forget to take into account the burden of
>> writing and maintaining pkgconfig itself.
> If is that useful and easy to archive why nobody even proposed that before?

Maybe because the original problem isn't as bad as it's made out to be.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list