From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23CF21381FA for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 20:04:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 45857E0BAD; Mon, 12 May 2014 20:04:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52869E0B03 for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 20:04:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [5.69.184.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hwoarang) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09D8C33FE8B for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 20:03:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <537128C8.6030909@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 21:02:16 +0100 From: Markos Chandras User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Banning modification of pkg-config files References: <20140509223202.795ea810@gentoo.org> <536D3BEC.5040800@gentoo.org> <1399703518.1994.32.camel@rook> <536DF3C8.2020406@gentoo.org> <536E2305.8010904@gentoo.org> <536E2B61.5090905@gentoo.org> <20140512174757.28473.qmail@stuge.se> In-Reply-To: <20140512174757.28473.qmail@stuge.se> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 2c768969-e66f-4486-91f3-d58812202b0a X-Archives-Hash: 454f92b052a431aa426e860db6acc4da On 05/12/2014 06:47 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Rich Freeman wrote: >>> Longterm, this makes it year after year more difficult to develop >>> software for "Linux". >> >> I'm with you here, but what is the solution? >> >> If we say we stick to upstream then we don't provide pkg-config files >> at all (in these cases). > > I think this is a sane default. > > >> Then when Debian does the other upstreams use them and then those >> packages break on Gentoo. > > I like Gentoo to stay very close to upstream. Gentoo should be close to upstream as much as possible and developers are actively encouraged during recruitment sessions to always try to upstream their patches. If you think a maintainer deviated from upstream for no good reason, well, I would like to think this is an exception instead of common practice. -- Regards, Markos Chandras