On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo
<lhf@tecgraf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
Please, do not drop lua.pc
But aren't downstream packagers in a much better position to
deliver lua.pc?
After all, they will know where and how Lua is installed. We can
only guess.
I'd say that no downstream packager uses our lua.pc intact anyway.
They are in a much better position to define the contents of the .pc
file, yes, but having the _name_ of the .pc file consistent across
systems would allow packages that use Lua libs to ask pkgconfig where
are the Lua libraries and headers. If we don't know the package name
to ask pkgconfig about, we're back to the guessing game, and then our
configure scripts might as well perform the guessing on library paths
(which we do now on the LuaRocks configure script, for example).
A consistent name for .pc files would allow reduce the need for users
to pass flags such as --with-lua-lib every time they run the configure
script, while still allowing downstream packagers to install Lua
anywhere they please, as long as they modify the .pc file's contents
accordingly.
-- Hisham
