On 19.11.2010 14:23, Frank Schönheit wrote:
Hi Björn,
If so, I think this is not a good idea at all: Consider modules such
as toolkit, svtools and svx, where there is a more or less complex
(well, let's say: well-arranged and -readable) folder structure below
the module's include folder. Putting all those files into the flat
<module>/inc/<module> folder will certainly not contribute to the
readability of the source tree.
Why would you want to put them into a _flat_ structure?
I don't want to. My understanding was it was required to, in the GNU
make build system.
Also note that
from the named modules toolkit and svtools are already migrated to the
new builds system. Just have a look at cws gnumake2.
Uhm. You see me confused. The trigger of this question was a call from
releng, which told me that in svtools, the content of
svtools/inc/svtools/toolpanel had to be moved to svtools/inc/svtools,
'cause of the new build system, which would not support such sub folders ...
For all readers that might got confused: with the new build systems, all
"delivered" headers must reside inside $(module)/inc/$(module), but of
course there may be further sub directories inside.
Placing delivered headers into this directory was the recommended way in
the old build system. Now it's a requirement.
Regards,
Mathias
--
Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer
OpenOffice.org Engineering at Oracle: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Please don't reply to "nospamfor...@gmx.de".
I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
