From: Alex K. <ak...@se...> - 2006-01-14 14:58:05
Attachments:
darwin-fixes.patch
|
Hi, I have set up development tools on OS X because that's my primary machine now, and made some fixes to openobex so that it compiles and runs there. Note that Apple's bluetooth API is completely different from bluez, so that won't work but at least USB interfaces work fine. The fixes are: - applications need to be linked against Apple's framework if USB support is enabled - libtoolize is called glibtoolize on OS X - TCSBRKP isn't defined anywhere, so I adopted this patch for a fix: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1038132&group_id=8960&atid=308960 - in ircp malloc.h is used, but ANSI C specifies stdlib.h instead - setting USB configuration always returns an error both on latest Linux kernels and on OS X, so it's attempted but not considered a fatal failure from now on. Alexander Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/ |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-17 23:32:55
|
Hi Alex, > I have set up development tools on OS X because that's my primary machine > now, and made some fixes to openobex so that it compiles and runs there. > > Note that Apple's bluetooth API is completely different from bluez, so > that won't work but at least USB interfaces work fine. The fixes are: > > - applications need to be linked against Apple's framework if USB support > is enabled > - libtoolize is called glibtoolize on OS X > - TCSBRKP isn't defined anywhere, so I adopted this patch for a fix: > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1038132&group_id=8960&atid=308960 > - in ircp malloc.h is used, but ANSI C specifies stdlib.h instead > - setting USB configuration always returns an error both on latest Linux > kernels and on OS X, so it's attempted but not considered a fatal failure > from now on. please split the USB stuff from the rest and send two separate patches. Regards Marcel |
From: Alex K. <ak...@se...> - 2006-01-18 10:11:03
Attachments:
usb-fixes.patch
darwin-fixes.patch
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >> I have set up development tools on OS X because that's my primary machine >> now, and made some fixes to openobex so that it compiles and runs there. > > please split the USB stuff from the rest and send two separate patches. Sure, there you go. By the way, someone should update the netowrk buffer reimplementation patch so that it applies against the latest cvs. Is the patch author still around? Alexander Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/ |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-18 13:04:06
|
Hi Alex, > >> I have set up development tools on OS X because that's my primary machine > >> now, and made some fixes to openobex so that it compiles and runs there. > > > > please split the USB stuff from the rest and send two separate patches. > > Sure, there you go. both are in the CVS now. Thanks. > By the way, someone should update the netowrk buffer reimplementation > patch so that it applies against the latest cvs. Is the patch author still > around? Should be really easy, because I didn't changed that much code. I only moved around some files. However my idea is to release openobex-1.1 and then apply the new network buffer implementation. Does anybody have any problems with the current CVS? Regards Marcel |
From: Christian W. Z. <Christian@Zuckschwerdt.org> - 2006-01-18 13:24:35
|
Hi Marcel, can you sum up this "file moving". As far as I can see you joined the apps and ircp with openobex, right? cu, Christian Marcel Holtmann wrote: >Should be really easy, because I didn't changed that much code. I only >moved around some files. > > |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-18 13:49:30
|
Hi Christian, > can you sum up this "file moving". As far as I can see you joined the > apps and ircp with openobex, right? they actually were already joined, because it was the same repository. We only generated two different source packages from it. I created a toplevel autoconf/automake and moved all the source code one directory up. So the next release will contain the library and the test tools. And it is now the job of the packages maintainer to split them. Regards Marcel |
From: Alex K. <ak...@se...> - 2006-01-18 15:13:24
|
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >> can you sum up this "file moving". As far as I can see you joined the >> apps and ircp with openobex, right? > > they actually were already joined, because it was the same repository. > We only generated two different source packages from it. I created a > toplevel autoconf/automake and moved all the source code one directory > up. So the next release will contain the library and the test tools. And > it is now the job of the packages maintainer to split them. By the way, how about using CVS also for obexftp? Perhaps merging it into the openobex tree is not feasible because the projects have separate maintainers and release schedules, but having obexftp in a separate toplevel module in the repository would be great. Alexander Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/ |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-18 15:19:20
|
Hi Alex, > >> can you sum up this "file moving". As far as I can see you joined the > >> apps and ircp with openobex, right? > > > > they actually were already joined, because it was the same repository. > > We only generated two different source packages from it. I created a > > toplevel autoconf/automake and moved all the source code one directory > > up. So the next release will contain the library and the test tools. And > > it is now the job of the packages maintainer to split them. > > By the way, how about using CVS also for obexftp? Perhaps merging it into > the openobex tree is not feasible because the projects have separate > maintainers and release schedules, but having obexftp in a separate > toplevel module in the repository would be great. this is fine with me, but it is not my responsibility. Regards Marcel |
From: Christian W. Z. <Christian@Zuckschwerdt.org> - 2006-01-19 10:24:27
|
Hi Marcel, I'm having trouble with the new pkg-config in openobex: $ pkg-config --cflags openobex Package libusb was not found in the pkg-config search path. Perhaps you should add the directory containing `libusb.pc' to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable Package 'libusb', required by 'OpenOBEX', not found At least my libusb-0.1.10a doesn't have a pkg-config file. cu, Christian |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 11:18:46
|
Hi Christian, > I'm having trouble with the new pkg-config in openobex: > > $ pkg-config --cflags openobex > Package libusb was not found in the pkg-config search path. > Perhaps you should add the directory containing `libusb.pc' > to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable > Package 'libusb', required by 'OpenOBEX', not found > > At least my libusb-0.1.10a doesn't have a pkg-config file. so far I only checked this on an Ubuntu Dapper system. This has also libusb-0.1.10a installed: Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) ||/ Name Version Description +++-==================-==================-==================================================== ii libusb-0.1-4 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming library ii libusb-dev 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming library development files On this system I have /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc and I don't see any problem. Regards Marcel |
From: Eduardo P. H. <eha...@co...> - 2006-01-19 11:30:38
|
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 12:18:21PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Christian, >=20 > > I'm having trouble with the new pkg-config in openobex: > >=20 > > $ pkg-config --cflags openobex > > Package libusb was not found in the pkg-config search path. > > Perhaps you should add the directory containing `libusb.pc' > > to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable > > Package 'libusb', required by 'OpenOBEX', not found > >=20 > > At least my libusb-0.1.10a doesn't have a pkg-config file. >=20 > so far I only checked this on an Ubuntu Dapper system. This has also > libusb-0.1.10a installed: >=20 > Desired=3DUnknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold > | Status=3DNot/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-install= ed > |/ Err?=3D(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=3Dboth-problems (Status,Err: uppe= rcase=3Dbad) > ||/ Name Version Description > +++-=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D-=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > ii libusb-0.1-4 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming libra= ry > ii libusb-dev 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming libra= ry development files >=20 > On this system I have /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc and I don't see any > problem. I had exactly the same problem on my system. I have libusb-0.1.10a on a Mandriva Cooker, and there is no libusb.pc. I had to remove the REQUIRES=3D"... libusb" from acinclude.m4 to build openobex from CVS. There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. --=20 Eduardo |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 11:41:43
|
Hi Eduardo, > > > I'm having trouble with the new pkg-config in openobex: > > > > > > $ pkg-config --cflags openobex > > > Package libusb was not found in the pkg-config search path. > > > Perhaps you should add the directory containing `libusb.pc' > > > to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable > > > Package 'libusb', required by 'OpenOBEX', not found > > > > > > At least my libusb-0.1.10a doesn't have a pkg-config file. > > > > so far I only checked this on an Ubuntu Dapper system. This has also > > libusb-0.1.10a installed: > > > > Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold > > | Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed > > |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad) > > ||/ Name Version Description > > +++-==================-==================-==================================================== > > ii libusb-0.1-4 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming library > > ii libusb-dev 0.1.10a-22ubuntu1 userspace USB programming library development files > > > > On this system I have /usr/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc and I don't see any > > problem. > > I had exactly the same problem on my system. I have libusb-0.1.10a > on a Mandriva Cooker, and there is no libusb.pc. I had to remove the > REQUIRES="... libusb" from acinclude.m4 to build openobex from CVS. this makes no sense, because the openobex CVS doesn't use pkgconfig for its configuration. > There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config > support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. The libusb however contains a libusb.pc.in file. Regards Marcel |
From: Eduardo P. H. <eha...@ra...> - 2006-01-19 11:52:46
|
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 12:41:32PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Eduardo, >=20 Hi, <snip> > >=20 > > I had exactly the same problem on my system. I have libusb-0.1.10a > > on a Mandriva Cooker, and there is no libusb.pc. I had to remove the > > REQUIRES=3D"... libusb" from acinclude.m4 to build openobex from CVS. >=20 > this makes no sense, because the openobex CVS doesn't use pkgconfig for > its configuration. I don't see why it makes no sense. There is an openobex.pc.in, and openobex ends up including libusb on Requires on openobex.pc. It causes the error reported by Christian because libusb has no pkg-config support on our systems. >=20 > > There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config > > support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. >=20 > The libusb however contains a libusb.pc.in file. Not on this tarball: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/libusb/libusb-0.1.1= 0a.tar.gz --=20 Eduardo |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 12:02:56
|
Hi Eduardo, > > > I had exactly the same problem on my system. I have libusb-0.1.10a > > > on a Mandriva Cooker, and there is no libusb.pc. I had to remove the > > > REQUIRES="... libusb" from acinclude.m4 to build openobex from CVS. > > > > this makes no sense, because the openobex CVS doesn't use pkgconfig for > > its configuration. > > I don't see why it makes no sense. the openobex finds the libusb without libusb.pc and links against it. Based on this it generates an openobex.pc which requires libusb.pc or not. However the openobex library gets installed no matter what libusb.pc exists or not. You get into trouble if you use pkgconfig to detect openobex, but this is not what you complained about. > > > There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config > > > support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. > > > > The libusb however contains a libusb.pc.in file. > > Not on this tarball: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/libusb/libusb-0.1.10a.tar.gz The CVS has it. Regards Marcel |
From: Eduardo P. H. <eha...@ra...> - 2006-01-19 12:27:16
|
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 01:02:44PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Eduardo, Hi, >=20 <snip> >=20 > the openobex finds the libusb without libusb.pc and links against it. > Based on this it generates an openobex.pc which requires libusb.pc or > not. However the openobex library gets installed no matter what > libusb.pc exists or not. But it gets installed with a broken openobex.pc, as reported by Christian. >=20 > You get into trouble if you use pkgconfig to detect openobex, but this > is not what you complained about. This was exactly what Christian had reported, and I said I had the same problem. But my message was confusing when I said that I needed a workaround to "build" openobex from CVS. >=20 > > > > There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config > > > > support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. > > >=20 > > > The libusb however contains a libusb.pc.in file. > >=20 > > Not on this tarball: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/libusb/libusb-0= =2E1.10a.tar.gz >=20 > The CVS has it. So, openobex won't support the libusb version 0.1.10a as released from libusb.sf.net? If openobex will support only the libusb versions that containg a libusb.pc, why not using pkg-config to find libusb on configure? Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. The current case seems a bit inconsistent to me: libusbwithout libusb.pc is supported at build time, but it generates an openobex install that isn't working completely ('pkg-config --cflags' openobex isn't working). --=20 Eduardo |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 12:39:26
|
Hi Eduardo, > > > > > There is no .pc file on the upstream libusb tarball. The pkg-config > > > > > support seems to be a feature added by the Ubuntu package. > > > > > > > > The libusb however contains a libusb.pc.in file. > > > > > > Not on this tarball: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/libusb/libusb-0.1.10a.tar.gz > > > > The CVS has it. > > So, openobex won't support the libusb version 0.1.10a as released from > libusb.sf.net? it supports the libusb-0.1.10a, but you can't use pkgconfig to detect openobex with this version. > If openobex will support only the libusb versions that containg a > libusb.pc, why not using pkg-config to find libusb on configure? As you stated above it is not upstream at the moment. > Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, > the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. No. The libusb needs to be fixed, because it is their bug not to install a libusb.pc file. The only other option is not to install the openobex pkgconfig file at all. > The current case seems a bit inconsistent to me: libusbwithout libusb.pc > is supported at build time, but it generates an openobex install that > isn't working completely ('pkg-config --cflags' openobex isn't working). Maybe from pkgconfig people, but people that detect openobex by themself and others that use openobex.m4 it would be bad to not include libusb support only because of a missing libusb.pc file. And as I said, make the upstream libusb maintainer to release a new version that includes libusb.pc or tell the package maintainer to fix their package. It seems the Ubuntu guys did, so no big deal. Regards Marcel |
From: Eduardo P. H. <eha...@ra...> - 2006-01-19 13:09:23
|
On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 01:39:12PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: > Hi Eduardo, >=20 Hi, (sorry for being too verbose :) <snip> >=20 > > Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, > > the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. >=20 > No. The libusb needs to be fixed, because it is their bug not to install > a libusb.pc file. The only other option is not to install the openobex > pkgconfig file at all. If not having pkg-config support is a bug on libusb, having a broken openobex.pc file seems to be a worse bug to me. But it is just my personal point of view. >=20 > > The current case seems a bit inconsistent to me: libusbwithout libusb.pc > > is supported at build time, but it generates an openobex install that > > isn't working completely ('pkg-config --cflags' openobex isn't working). >=20 > Maybe from pkgconfig people, but people that detect openobex by themself > and others that use openobex.m4 it would be bad to not include libusb > support only because of a missing libusb.pc file. I think I got your point: currently a missing libusb.pc file will break openobex.pc but you think it is better than not supporting libusb-without-pkgconfig at all. I was seeing the broken openobex.pc file as worse problem, and preferred just telling the user "get a newer libusb, otherwise your openobex install will be broken". I see it as a problem because I think pkg-config support is important for a library. It is just my personal view, anyway. >=20 > And as I said, make the upstream libusb maintainer to release a new > version that includes libusb.pc or tell the package maintainer to fix > their package. It seems the Ubuntu guys did, so no big deal. The problem I see is that I give more importance to have pkg-config support on openobex working. I see it as important enough that it is worth a workaround until a new libusb with pkg-config support is released. After all, openobex is a library and I suppose we want people to be able to use it easily on their buildsystems. Anway, I suggest the workaround below. It will affect only the pkg-config support on openobex (that is broken when using the upstream libusb, right now). Feel free to drop it if you still disagree with my point. I won't take it personally, I understood your point. :) But I just think that it is good to keep openobex pkgconfig working when using the upstream libusb. --=20 Eduardo diff -u -r1.7 openobex/acinclude.m4 --- openobex/acinclude.m4 3 Jan 2006 10:46:36 -0000 1.7 +++ openobex/acinclude.m4 19 Jan 2006 13:03:28 -0000 @@ -189,7 +189,6 @@ =20 if (test "${usb_enable}" =3D "yes" && test "${usb_found}" =3D "yes"); then AC_DEFINE(HAVE_USB, 1, [Define if system supports USB and it's enabled]) - REQUIRES=3D"$REQUIRES libusb" fi =20 AM_CONDITIONAL(APPS, test "${apps_enable}" =3D "yes") |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 13:24:47
|
Hi Eduardo, > > > Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, > > > the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. > > > > No. The libusb needs to be fixed, because it is their bug not to install > > a libusb.pc file. The only other option is not to install the openobex > > pkgconfig file at all. > > If not having pkg-config support is a bug on libusb, having a broken > openobex.pc file seems to be a worse bug to me. But it is just my personal > point of view. The openobex.pc is not broken. That's a problem of pkg-config itself, because in this case it misses something in the chain. The openobex.pc file itself is fully correct. You miss a libusb.pc on your system. And if this file is missing, it is a libusb bug. > > > The current case seems a bit inconsistent to me: libusbwithout libusb.pc > > > is supported at build time, but it generates an openobex install that > > > isn't working completely ('pkg-config --cflags' openobex isn't working). > > > > Maybe from pkgconfig people, but people that detect openobex by themself > > and others that use openobex.m4 it would be bad to not include libusb > > support only because of a missing libusb.pc file. > > I think I got your point: currently a missing libusb.pc file will > break openobex.pc but you think it is better than not supporting > libusb-without-pkgconfig at all. I will restrict people that use pkg-config for their library detection, but again the openobex.pc file is correct. The missing libusb.pc is here the problem. > I was seeing the broken openobex.pc file as worse problem, and preferred > just telling the user "get a newer libusb, otherwise your openobex > install will be broken". I see it as a problem because I think > pkg-config support is important for a library. It is just my personal > view, anyway. Again, openobex.pc is not broken. The libusb package misses a libusb.pc file. > Anway, I suggest the workaround below. It will affect only the pkg-config > support on openobex (that is broken when using the upstream libusb, > right now). > > Feel free to drop it if you still disagree with my point. I won't take > it personally, I understood your point. :) But I just think that it > is good to keep openobex pkgconfig working when using the upstream libusb. This workaround makes it more worse. Now people can detect openobex through pkg-config, but they never link with -lusb and this makes their application also useless. If it makes you happy, I can disable USB support at all if no libusb.pc is found. Regards Marcel |
From: Christian W. Z. <Christian@Zuckschwerdt.org> - 2006-01-19 13:15:57
|
Hi, Eduardo Pereira Habkost wrote: >But it gets installed with a broken openobex.pc, > >If openobex will support only the libusb versions that containg a >libusb.pc, why not using pkg-config to find libusb on configure? > >Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, >the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. > > I second Eduardo here, it doesn't seem consistent to me. The local m4 from openobex cvs is smart enough to find libusb on its own. On the other hand users of the openobex.pc are condemned to have a libusb.pc which is not easily available? I don't know about the dependencies here: If I use openobex.m4 I need to take care of including some usb support on my own. But if I use the pkg-config I can't choose how to include the usb support? Perhaps these dependancies are the intented advantage of pkg-config over m4 macros? Nonetheless having a broken file is clearly subverting that. A workaround to smooth the transition to pkg-config would be really useful. cu, Christian |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 13:41:13
|
Hi Christian, > >But it gets installed with a broken openobex.pc, > > > >If openobex will support only the libusb versions that containg a > >libusb.pc, why not using pkg-config to find libusb on configure? > > > >Otherwise, if libusb without libusb.pc is supposed to be supported, > >the generation of a broken openobex.pc in this case seems to need a fix. > > I second Eduardo here, it doesn't seem consistent to me. The local m4 > from openobex cvs is smart enough to find libusb on its own. On the > other hand users of the openobex.pc are condemned to have a libusb.pc > which is not easily available? > > I don't know about the dependencies here: If I use openobex.m4 I need to > take care of including some usb support on my own. But if I use the > pkg-config I can't choose how to include the usb support? > > Perhaps these dependancies are the intented advantage of pkg-config over > m4 macros? Nonetheless having a broken file is clearly subverting that. > > A workaround to smooth the transition to pkg-config would be really useful. I don't do workarounds for such a problem, because the openobex.pc file is correct and the bug is in the libusb package. However I included a check for ${prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc now and if this file can't be found the USB support will be disabled. So now its up to the libusb upstream and package maintainers to include a libusb.pc to get USB support for OpenOBEX. Regards Marcel |
From: Eduardo P. H. <eha...@ra...> - 2006-01-19 13:58:57
|
Hi, Marcel, On Thu, Jan 19, 2006 at 02:41:03PM +0100, Marcel Holtmann wrote: <snip> >=20 > I don't do workarounds for such a problem, because the openobex.pc file > is correct and the bug is in the libusb package. This seems to be a sensible question: why not having pkg-config support on a library is a bug? The library just doesn't support pkg-config. There are lots of libraries that simply doesn't support pkg-config and doesn't have a .pc file. The current upstream version of libusb is on this set. > However I included a > check for ${prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc now and if this file can't > be found the USB support will be disabled. Any reason to not use PKG_CHECK_MODULES for that? This check will ignore PKG_CONFIG_PATH, for example. >=20 > So now its up to the libusb upstream and package maintainers to include > a libusb.pc to get USB support for OpenOBEX. This looks like a acceptable policy, as the CVS version of libusb already has pkg-config support. --=20 Eduardo |
From: Alex K. <ak...@se...> - 2006-01-19 14:04:12
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Eduardo Pereira Habkost wrote: >> So now its up to the libusb upstream and package maintainers to include >> a libusb.pc to get USB support for OpenOBEX. > > This looks like a acceptable policy, as the CVS version of libusb already > has pkg-config support. Not the 1.0 development branch as far as I see. Am I missing something? http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/libusb/libusb/?only_with_tag=V1_0_DEVEL Alexander Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/ |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 14:06:24
|
Hi Eduardo, > > I don't do workarounds for such a problem, because the openobex.pc file > > is correct and the bug is in the libusb package. > > This seems to be a sensible question: why not having pkg-config support > on a library is a bug? The library just doesn't support pkg-config. > > There are lots of libraries that simply doesn't support pkg-config and > doesn't have a .pc file. The current upstream version of libusb is on > this set. the libusb actually have pkg-config support. It is in the CVS and the Ubuntu guys already backported it. So I can safely consider this a bug. A package that never had or never will have pkg-config is a different story. > > However I included a > > check for ${prefix}/lib/pkgconfig/libusb.pc now and if this file can't > > be found the USB support will be disabled. > > Any reason to not use PKG_CHECK_MODULES for that? This check will ignore > PKG_CONFIG_PATH, for example. Some embedded systems might not have pkg-config at all. And this will mean you can't even configure it. Using the ${prefix} or ${usb_prefix} to be more precise is sane and it can be modified with --with-usb. Regards Marcel |
From: Alex K. <ak...@se...> - 2006-01-19 14:20:13
|
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Marcel Holtmann wrote: >> Any reason to not use PKG_CHECK_MODULES for that? This check will ignore >> PKG_CONFIG_PATH, for example. > > Some embedded systems might not have pkg-config at all. And this will > mean you can't even configure it. Using the ${prefix} or ${usb_prefix} > to be more precise is sane and it can be modified with --with-usb. So you can force USB support in openobex with --with-usb, even there is no libusb.pc? Then I have no problem. Someone should document this in a wiki perhaps. Alexander Homepage: http://www.sensi.org/~ak/ |
From: Marcel H. <ma...@ho...> - 2006-01-19 14:27:45
|
Hi Alex, > >> Any reason to not use PKG_CHECK_MODULES for that? This check will ignore > >> PKG_CONFIG_PATH, for example. > > > > Some embedded systems might not have pkg-config at all. And this will > > mean you can't even configure it. Using the ${prefix} or ${usb_prefix} > > to be more precise is sane and it can be modified with --with-usb. > > So you can force USB support in openobex with --with-usb, even there is no > libusb.pc? Then I have no problem. Someone should document this in a wiki > perhaps. no you can't. You can only specify another ${usb_prefix}, but you still need a libusb.pc in that installation prefix. Regards Marcel |