Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Matt Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > How would people feel if I moved gnucash to automake? <snip>
> Depending on how you do it, this would probably be fine with me.
> The only reason I've never attempted this is that I don't know much
> about automake (just enough to patch up a few broken things in other
> projects here and there). In theory, it sounds like a good idea as
> long as it's still flexible enough to do what we need. Worst case,
> we should still be able to drop down to raw shell scripting if we
> have to.
Yes, the Makefile.am's are just pre-processed makefiles. So there is
a lot of flexibility there. So far, I don't think gnucash has any
exotic needs from the build system. I don't forsee a bad fit, but
we'll see.
> I've also sent my big patch to Linas, so expect to see it
> soon. <snip>
Great.
> > I'll mention now that a switch to automake makes sense only in the
> > context of my mail earlier this week. Namely, that we move to a
> > system where the gnome/motif/qt decision happens at ./configure
> > time, not make time. The motivation behind this is early detection
> > of build problems, thereby reducing gnucash compilation problems.
>
> Did you determine that we couldn't keep support for building both at
> the same time, or did you just end up suggesting that we'd have to
> just run two configures in separate directories -- which you had
> said would be pretty easy to do given the way automake handles
> multiple architectures (am I recalling all this right?)?
I am sure that with the proper amount of effort the current scheme
could be kept and improved to the point where it satisfies my desires.
When you typed "make gnome" it would say "could not find guile" or
whatever.
But I'm leaning towards automake simply because it is proving to be so
easy to deal with.
> > - Current versions have a dependency mechanism that requires that gcc
> > be used by the person updating dependencies. (it is otherwise
> > automatic)
>
> Do you mean that it circumvents the automatic compile-time
> determination of dependencies. If so, I don't like that.
I'll look into it more. The makefiles automake generates create
dependency info the same way gnucash does. I think gnucash's method
depends on gcc too.
> > I'd appreciate any thoughts people had on this. If nobody raises a
> > red flag, I'll continue to poke around with this. If in the end
> > automake still seems like a good fit, I'll send off a patch.
>
> Go for it. And feel free to ask me if you don't understand why some
> of the things are currently done the way they are.
src/engine is compiled with -fpic so, according to the comments, it
can be put into things like perl modules. Are there any examples of
where this has been done?
--
matt - http://www.lickey.com
----- %< -------------------------------------------- >% ------
The GnuCash / X-Accountant Mailing List
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
put "unsubscribe gnucash-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]" in the body
