On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 at 03:08, Christopher Wellons
<wellons@nullprogram.com> wrote:
> Besides, sdl2-config deprecation is unfortunate. If the official choices
> were either pkg-config or CMake, I would not have taken SDL2 seriously
> enough to have written this article. (I also cannot in good conscience
> recommend use of either pkg-config or CMake.) You might object, "What if
> every library had its own config script? It would be a mess." I agree, but
> SDL isn't just a library. It's a whole platform requiring buy-in, and so
> it sits in a special place. sdl2-config is analogous to musl-gcc, as musl
> isn't just another library.

I did wonder why you didn't like the pkg-config method, and you make a
good point. Considering this isn't decided with SDL3 yet, maybe it's
worth making a comment upstream to suggest they have an "sdl3-config"

Thank you for your great article about SDL2 mistakes:

 https://nullprogram.com/blog/2023/01/08/

One suggestion, it seems sdl2-config will be deprecated with SDL3, with
the replacement being the standard pkg-config:

 Deprecate sdl2-config and AM_PATH_SDL2
 https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL/pull/6467

Perhaps it is better to recommend using pkg-config?

SDL2 ships with "sdl2.pc" and the output is effectively the same: