Bug#909740: libsdl2-dev: No longer multi-arch co-installable

[Hugh McMaster]

On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 at 10:51 pm, Simon McVittie wrote:

> With which of my patches? I sent three merge requests (!3, !4, !5) with
> different ways to solve multiarch coinstallability, each with different
> advantages and disadvantages, in the hope that at least one of them would
> be considered acceptable and unblock progress on this bug.


Sorry, I should have said I applied !5.

>
> I would expect that !5 (the one that Felix has now merged, using
> $PKG_CONFIG) and !4 (closer to what you and Adrian suggested, using $CC)
> would break the neverball use-case when used as-is, as Felix pointed out.
> This is because they do not have -I/usr/include/SDL2 in
> `sdl2-config --cflags`, so #include <SDL_ttf.h> won't work. To avoid that
> regression, if !5 (or !4) is still the preferred option, one option is
> to hard-code -I/usr/include/SDL2 in addition to -I${libdir}/SDL2.


Yes, adding the extra include path fixed the build failure.

However, I would have expected !3 (which would now mean reverting the
> main commit from !5 and applying !3 instead) to work OK for neverball's
> use-case, because it leaves -I/usr/include/SDL2 in `sdl2-config --cflags`,
> the same as in the non-multiarch-capable implementation currently in
> the archive; so I'd be surprised if this breaks neverball. If this is
> the one you tested, please could you indicate the exact patch or git
> commit you used?
>
> When I get a chance to work on this again, I'll add an autopkgtest that
> does what neverball relies on, and re-test with that.
>
> I still like !3 best, but I'm happy to fix !5 (or even !4) to avoid the
> neverball regression if the SDL2 maintainers would prefer that.
>

At this point, I don’t see anything preventing us from adding the extra
include path, although I’m going to do some tests builds of various
SDL2-based programs to be certain.

Neverball could also be patched to call pkg-config with SDL2_ttf, which,
IIRC, has both include paths already (since SDL2_ttf requires SDL2).
Unfortunately, this won’t resolve the broader problem.

> Also, this small addition has far less overhead than multiple copies
> > of the SDL2 headers.


I think I was commenting on the small change to the pkg-config file, but as
you point out, !4 and !5 already duplicate the headers. So I was obviously
thinking about something else when I wrote that.

Hugh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-sdl-maintainers/attachments/20191211/5ea919ec/attachment.html>