Re: TODO

[Scott James Remnant]

On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 12:17 -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> 
> >> However it *also* provides the right -I flags to point at the include
> >> files.  A GTK+ application will '#include <gtk/gtkbutton.h>' for example
> >> and require -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 to actually be able to find that (or
> >> -1.0, -3.0, etc.)
> >
> > That's a good feature.  Dunno whether I want that (or it can even be) in
> > a .la file or not.  But letting libtool output both information might
> > prove valuable.  Absorbing pkgconfig in libtool in a way that each
> > pkgconfig user must use libtool will pave way for quote some resistance,
> > I'd expect.
> 
> pkg-config does not issue the "right" -I flags.  It merely proposes 
> some based on where the package is installed.  This is fine if the 
> package is used in isolation.  Sometimes these flags work ok in 
> conjuction with flags from other unrelated packages, but other times 
> it results in a bloody mess and wrong behavior.
> 
It should never do ... the intent is that the directory specified by the
-I flag *only* contains the include files of the given package;
otherwise you'd be doing -I/usr/include or similar which pkg-config
specifically removes from any output.

Do you have an example of the wrong behaviour?

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part