Re: Compiling problems

Owen Taylor wrote:
> Dan Kegel <> writes:
> > pkg-config is the spawn of the devil because it makes
> > it difficult to cross-compile ...
>  * With pkg-config, lookup of compilation information is standardized,
>    so cross compilation can be handled in a standard way. Maybe some
>    feature addition to pkg-config is needed, but *fixing* the problem
>    is possible.
>  * With package-specific config scripts every package is different.
>  * With old fashioned hardcoded autoconf tests, it's hell for everyone.
> Please don't confuse:
>  - I have trouble getting stuff to cross compile with pkg-config right now
> With:
>  - pkg-config is the wrong way to do things

If I sounded grumpy, it's because I'm tired of fixing people's code
so it is cross-compile-friendly.  
pkg-config looked like One More Thing to Fix.  It still kinda does.  
I rather prefer autoconf macros for each library; they're more powerful.
One way pkg-config, and indeed configure scripts, fall down is that
they are inflexible when it comes to tailoring which shared libraries
you link to.  This means you have to link to all of the shared libraries
a package provides, even if you only use a few of them.  This shouldn't
be a problem, except that simply linking to a shared library seems
to pull it into memory, causing RAM waste that can be a killer on
embedded systems.

I remain unconvinced that pkg-config is a good way to do things.  I
suppose it might make things more convenient, but it might also
get in the way of making embedded systems work.  I hope I'm wrong.
- Dan

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]