Re: [libgpiod][PATCH] README: list the development packages required to build the library

[Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 04:57:40PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 4:50 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 04:24:51PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > >
> > > The error messages emitted by configure when either libtool, pkg-config
> > > or autoconf-archive packages are missing on the host are not very clear
> > > and seem to cause confusion among users building the project from
> > > sources. List the required packages in the README.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  README | 5 +++++
> > >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/README b/README
> > > index a6f24d1..a20e801 100644
> > > --- a/README
> > > +++ b/README
> > > @@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ BUILDING
> > >  This is a pretty standard autotools project. The core C library does not have
> > >  any external dependencies other than the standard C library with GNU extensions.
> > >
> > > +The build system requires autotools, autoconf-archive, libtool and pkg-config
> > > +to be installed on the host system for the basic build. Development files for
> > > +additional libraries may be required depending on selected options. The
> > > +configure script will typically prompt the user for them clearly when missing.
> > > +
> >
> > typically?  Shouldn't that always be the case?
> >
>
> I used the word "typically" because I am simply not sure if *all*
> potentially missing dependencies will get reported correctly. We
> identified the ones listed above as causing confusing error message.
> Maybe there are more, just unreported (yet)?
>

You have covered the core dependencies, required just to get configure
to run, so you can assume those are present.
I would consider any other that case produced a confusing error to be a bug
to be fixed when found.
The problem with the "typically" is it normalises such a failure, so
then it wont be reported.

Cheers,
Kent.

> > "prompt" makes it seem interactive.
> > I would reword as "The configure script will report any missing additional
> > required dependencies."
> >
>
> Sure, can use this instead.
>
> Bart
>
> > Cheers,
> > Kent.