On Friday 15 July 2005 19:33, Chris Cannam wrote: > Are we going to ditch autotools entirely for the next release, or > support both build systems? > > I ask because there's currently a pretty nasty inconsistency -- various > files still need to #include "config.h" to work with autotools, but > scons doesn't update config.h, so we can end up with with symbols > defined with different values in different places. (I assume our scons > setup has some logic to at least create config.h if it doesn't exist, > otherwise these files would fail to build, but it doesn't ensure that > it's correct if it does exist.)
Actually scons (well, our SConstruct script) will only create an empty config.h if one doesn't exist, but all the config options are actually passed through -D command line arguments. To avoid any conflict we can create it every time, but IMHO we should drop the autotools altogether. Given that we also have a mini scons available for those who don't have it installed yet, there's really no reason to keep autobarf around. -- Guillaume. http://www.telegraph-road.org ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
