Bug#504220: Missing dependencies

[Sebastian Dröge]

Am Sonntag, den 02.11.2008, 09:10 +0100 schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
> [...]
> That indicates that Requires.private is indeed used on purpose. [1]
> indicates that you are right, and the -dev packages are indeed missing
> depedencies. However I'd love to see some more authoritative
> documentation on that topic, because the difference between Libs.private
> and Requires.private is still very unclear to me.
> 
> [1] http://osdir.com/ml/freedesktop.xorg.modular/2006-04/msg00017.html

No idea about pkg-config documentation... it's one of the most used but
worst documented pieces of software :)

Requires.private corresponds to Requires, i.e. it contains references to
required pkg-config files (with optional versions, ...) but the LIBS of
them will only be used for static linking.

Libs.private is the same for Libs, i.e. it contains linker flags
(-lfoobar -L/usr/include/blingblong) that will only be used for static
linking.

If something is in Requires.private -dev packages _must_ depend on it,
if it's in Libs.private -dev packages only need to depend on it if they
ship static libraries (AFAIK).

If you forget something from Requires.private pkg-config --cflags $thing
will fail and complain about stuff from Requires.private missing.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20081102/3432f8c3/attachment.pgp