pkgconfig license

[Matthieu Herrb]

Owen Taylor wrote:

> On this issue OpenBSD and NetBSD will have to decide whether they want
> to spend a few days of a developer's time to rewrite pkg-config from
> scratch or make an exception. But I can't see how it should be a concern
> of the X.org project or cause distortion of the build system.

This is one possibility, but we'd like to avoid it if possible. Are you 
officially telling that changing pkgconfig is totally out of question ?

> The use of a GPL pkg-config for the build has no material affect on any
> use of the X libraries or systems and objections to its licensing seem
> to be primarily political. ("political" here isn't meant as a term of
> abuse. The GPL is an explicitly political license.)

Sure. We all understand that. This is not the point.

Requiring pkgconfig to build the modular tree breaks the goal to be able 
to build X as part as OpenBSD's base system without requiring more GNU 
tools to be installed (I never said *any* GNU tool when expressig this 
in the past).

> (Wondering what *compiler* is being used for this base system build...)

It has been discussed several times on various lists and forums. It is 
not relevant here. gcc and GNU binutils part of OpenBSD and NetBSD. 
There are currently no useable open source replacement for them.
-- 
Matthieu Herrb