On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 at 12:38, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 14/12/21 22:28, Emil Velikov wrote:
On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 at 11:28, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 14/12/21 20:40, Emil Velikov wrote:
Hey Allan,
I really like the idea, although I might have spotted some gotchas.
On Sun, 12 Dec 2021 at 10:54, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
This patch series replaces the old libdepends/libprovides system into something akin to that used by APK. In short, makepkg.conf will have a variable like:
LIB_DIRS=('lib:usr/lib' 'lib32:usr/lib32')
Considering your examples (below) also handle "cmd" and "pc" the LIB_DIRS name is misleading. Alas no better suggestion comes to mind ATM.
Not really... This is the path for adding library dependencies & provides. If other autodeps get added, they may need their own configuration option.
This sounds great.
[snip]
Are we going to continue or error out - is the error message going to be meaningful or rather cryptic?
As above, nothing will happen. The usr/lib23 directory will (I guess) never occur in a package, so never be searched for files with an soname.
We might want to have a simple check in makepkg, to high-light those. If PKGBUILD has "provides" to a non-existant file, we could error out IMHO.
This will catch both typos on the packaging side as well as buggy upstream - say they dropped/renamed the library, or a particular configure combination no longer builds one of the dozen+ DSOs.
I don't understand this suggestion. There would be no non-existent provide, as makepkg would not add one unless it finds one in the configured path. This is a complete change from the current system where the name of the library needed to be in the PKGBUILD. Now makepkg will automatically detect and add these values.
And we can't distinguish between a package that has no libraries to be provided and a makepkg.conf with a typo pointing to the wrong directory.
My bad, I didn't fully read the series and made the wrong assumption. Please ignore the above. -Emil