On Friday, September 16, 2011 08:47:52 PM Yury G. Kudryashov wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > Hi, > > > > same as with many others: > > > > * unnecessary shortcut at the top > > * unnecessary if() around the pkgconfig stuff > > > > Otherwise, it looks fine I'd say. > > enchant installs its headers to $prefix/include/enchant by default. Thus > the current code will not find enchant unless pkg-config information is > available.
Ah, hmm, that's not good. > Another question: should we force users to add > $enchant_prefix/include/enchant to include_dirs(), or find_path( ... > enchant/enchant++.h ...), and leave the decision whether to include > $enchant_prefix/include or $enchant_prefix/include/enchant to the user? For many packages the package itself determines in which way its headers must be included. That's not the case for enchant ? What does pkgconfig returns as include dirs ? Maybe we should then go for the same. Alex _______________________________________________ Kde-buildsystem mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-buildsystem
