Hello All: Either way should work with frameworks. The typical is something of the form:
collapsed: gdal/<headers> but this is fine as well not collapsed: gdal/<path>…./someheader.h the one that is not collapsed will require a custom cmake process to make the directory structure in the gdal.framworks. If it's collapsed then cmake's framework support will handle it more easily when doing a framework layout on MACs. Take care Garrett On Nov 4, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Dan Homerick wrote: > On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:06 AM, David Burken <dbur...@comcast.net> wrote: >> Keeping the sub directories allows you to develop off checked out code base >> with one include path. You could do that with flattened path but you would >> have to move the headers in your code tree. I'm all for that but it's >> really not up to me. If you move the includes around on the install then >> it complicates the include paths when building against the code tree versus >> building against an installed version. I hope that makes sense. Many >> packages separate the includes in their source tree, e.g. geos, ossim, >> opencv. The source tree includes mirror the installed include tree. So >> it's less complicated and this makes for easy installs / uninstalls. >> >> Dave > > I'm in favor of not flattening the include paths in the installed > version, for just the reasons that Dave listed. In my experience, > making the installed paths different than the source tree has little > added value for the user, while adding developer headache. The user > doesn't generally need to include very many files, and those files > tend to be near the root of the tree anyways. > > Cheers, > - Dan > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev