[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] *.rc: add real license to LegalCopyright string

[Reimar Döffinger]

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 05:12:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 11/12/13 4:30 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > On date Wednesday 2013-12-11 14:14:00 -0300, James Almer encoded:
> >> On 11/12/13 11:03 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:58 PM, James Almer <jamrial at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 10/12/13 10:45 PM, Timothy Gu wrote:
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Timothy Gu <timothygu99 at gmail.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Depends on the gen-rc patch
> >>>>
> >>>> This can be applied to the rc files in the tree, then to gen-rc
> >>>> in a separate patch once and if that's committed.
> >>>>
> >>>> The patch is good, but IANAL, so I'll let the review to someone
> >>>> more knowledgeable about the whole licensing stuff.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why are the .rc files committed to the tree? Shouldn't they be generated
> >>> during the build?
> > 
> > I wondered the same.
> > 
> > I see that av*res.rc files are mostly boilerplate, in order to make
> > them consistent it would make sense to generate them through a
> > generator (so that there is no need to change all the generated files
> > in case a single part is changed, you only need to tweak the generator
> > script), similarly to what we did with .pc files.
> > 
> > OTOH I really don't know the complexity/convenience tradeoff in this
> > case.
> 
> But unlike .rc files, pkg-config files need to be created since their 
> contents depend on variables they can't access from C headers or Makefiles, 
> like library version, paths or what extra libraries to link.
> 
> If people really prefer to generate the .rc files at configure time then go 
> ahead and make that change. But I don't personally consider it's worth it. 
> You'd be creating at configure time something that doesn't need to.

_If_ generating them I think they at least should be generated during
"make", not configure, so that there is at least proper dependency
tracking.