On Monday 30 April 2012 02:16:40 Michał Górny wrote: > On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 00:08:34 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Sunday 29 April 2012 18:40:00 Jeff Horelick wrote: > > > I'd just like to say, i'm also an Atheme project member and I have > > > authorisation from nenolod (the primary pkgconf developer) to make > > > changes and stuff, so I can upstream any changes necessary to make > > > pkgconf work for us. > > > > that sounds really good. i sent you some patches ;). > > > > however, it's missing pkg.m4. any thoughts on that ? > > Maybe we should provide it independently in some other package. > Considering the implementations are supposed to be compatible, the .m4 > file should work fine with all of them. And we'll create same configure > files independently of which impl particular user uses.
i debated that, but i'd rather not split the canonical pkg-config package into (quite literally) two files. it makes upgrading dev-util/pkgconfig more of a hassle, and having these re-implementations take care of things themselves seems to be easier atm. if that ends up not being the case, we can always revisit ... the current implementation doesn't preclude splitting. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
