...

...

On 8/11/2009 at 13:47, Philipp Thomas wrote: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529921 shows why encoding system library paths like /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 in pkgconfig files is a very bad idea indeed.

I'd propose to add a brp script that checks for -L%{libdir} in .pc files and fails the package if found. That way maintainers of a package that comes with .pc files would be forced to fix their packages. I'd even volunteer to write said brp script.

Philipp, I like the idea of a brp check failing on this. It's the only way to get it consistent and to be sure maintainers actually see it / think about it. Do we have an estimate on how many packages are going to fail if we implement this? (the bug report actually reads the *-config scripts as well besides checking the *.pc files, this would probably be needed too in the same check). Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

Le mardi 11 août 2009, à 13:47 +0200, Philipp Thomas a écrit :

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529921 shows why encoding system library paths like /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 in pkgconfig files is a very bad idea indeed.

(didn't look at the bug, I'll just trust you here)

I'd propose to add a brp script that checks for -L%{libdir} in .pc files and fails the package if found. That way maintainers of a package that comes with .pc files would be forced to fix their packages. I'd even volunteer to write said brp script.

This means that nearly all pkg-config files must be changed (basically, if I look at what I have on my system)? So, hrm, I'd like to avoid this, please :-) Would be better to file bugs upstream for all libraries shipping a pkg-config file first. And then do this in the next development cycle. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

Am Dienstag 11 August 2009 schrieb Philipp Thomas:

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529921 shows why encoding system library paths like /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 in pkgconfig files is a very bad idea indeed.

I'd propose to add a brp script that checks for -L%{libdir} in .pc files and fails the package if found. That way maintainers of a package that comes with .pc files would be forced to fix their packages. I'd even volunteer to write said brp script.

Why has the package to be changed? Wouldn't it be enough if said brp script simply patches the paths out? Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 11 Aug 2009, Philipp Thomas wrote:

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529921 shows why encoding system library paths like /usr/lib and /usr/lib64 in pkgconfig files is a very bad idea indeed.

Indeed.

I'd propose to add a brp script that checks for -L%{libdir} in .pc files and fails the package if found. That way maintainers of a package that comes with .pc files would be forced to fix their packages. I'd even volunteer to write said brp script.

These days we would do this as part of rpmlint I guess. But thanks for volunteering. Richard. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org