[LAD] ?==?utf-8?q? Updates

[Hermann Meyer]

Am 28.08.2018 um 16:37 schrieb David Runge:
> On 2018-08-27 21:23:47 (+0200), Christopher Arndt wrote:
>> Am 26.08.18 um 14:49 schrieb Ralf Mattes:
>>>   
>>> Am Sonntag, 26. August 2018 13:07 CEST, Fons Adriaensen <fons at linuxaudio.org> schrieb:
>>>> I seem to have both pkgconf and pkg-config, and on Archlinux both
>>>> are even provided by the same package.
>>>>
>>>> I used pkgconf as suggested by an Archlinux packager. Don't know
>>>> if this is the best choice to support other distros.
>>> No, it's not.
>>>> Anyway, all that is required is -I/usr/include/freetype2 and maybe
>>>> that is what I should use.
>>> Please don't.
>> Agree on both accounts. Just use 'pkg-config' like everybody else.
> I don't.
>
> pkgconf [1] is a valid replacement of pkg-config (by implementing it
> with even more features and better .pc handling) and available on many,
> if not all, distros (e.g. [2] [3] [4]). In some it is even the default
> by now.
>
> Additionally, this is all better, than relying on a convenience layer
> hack job, such as the `freetype-config` script (that should've never
> even been part of pkg-config to begin with).
>
> Best,
> David
>
> [1] https://git.dereferenced.org/pkgconf/pkgconf
> [2] https://packages.debian.org/sid/pkgconf
> [3] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=pkgconf
> [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/pkgconf_as_system_pkg-config_implementation
>
>
But why do you prefer to abuse users experience to promote a 
replacement, when a simple silence replacement is already in place?
Using pkg-config means that it works on any system, even older ones, as 
pkgconfig provide a symlink to pkg-config and replace it therewith 
"really", without trouble for anyone.