Re: [PATCH 1/5] gnu: Add efl.

[Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>]

On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 08:43:09PM +0100, tcech@suse.cz wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 08:24:54PM +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> >You could also try to move them to normal inputs and see whether another
> >package depending on efl still compiles.
> I'm afraid that I found what propagated-input is thanks to this. I'm
> sure that elementary or others won't build without that.

Sorry, what I suggested as a test actually does not work. The question is:
Does everything built with efl requires the additional libraries, or may
there be packages building with efl, but without these additional libraries?
Of course, no finite number of examples constitutes a proof...

I found the following:
   http://people.freedesktop.org/~dbn/pkg-config-guide.html
Requires: A list of packages required by this package. The versions of these packages may be specified using the comparison operators =, <, >, <= or >=.
Requires.private: A list of private packages required by this package but not exposed to applications. The version specific rules from the Requires field also apply here.

This sounds as if only "Requires" libraries need to be propagated, whereas
"Requires.private" libraries are already handled by our ld wrapper.

The page above links to the following:
   https://wiki.openmandriva.org/en/Overlinking_issues_in_packaging

This seems to confirm my opinion, but it would be good if someone more
knowledgeable on pkg-config could comment on the issue.

Andreas