Hi Justin,
On 2/2/2010 6:39 PM, Justin Seyster wrote:
I'm pretty sure that making the framework a convenience library is my
ideal solution: the plug-in author will be able to distribute a single
shared object without any non-standard dependencies. However, I read
that Automake does not allow i
I'm working on a support framework for plug-ins, and I'm struggling to
come up with a way to compile it. I'm leaning towards building it as
a convenience library, but there a few SNAFUs.
Each plug-in is itself a shared library. I would like to avoid having
a second shared library that the plug-i
I have a package that uses Perl modules that I would like installed in
@INC, e.g., in /usr/share/perl5. Searching through the Automake list
archives, the most relevant thread I was able to locate was:
http://sourceware.org/ml/automake/2003-05/msg00069.html
However, the solution suggested there
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, NightStrike wrote:
What is the convention held by the typical project out there? I know
nothing about licenses, nor how to actually handle them. All insight
is greatly appreciated.
Copyright information should always be retained and presentable in
some way in order to sat
Right now, we distribute license files in the source archives by
adding them to the EXTRA_DIST variable.
We do not, however, include the license files in tarballs that we make
and distribute of the BINARY archives. I know automake has a lot
ofrules and stuff detailing how to build and package sou
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, wrote:
> I use a couple of third-party libraries in my software. I use SUBDIRS
> variable in my Makefile.am and AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS in my configure.in. How to
> suppress installation of SUBDIRed projects? I just use they for static
> linkage with my binary and don't n
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:39 PM, wrote:
> * Steffen Dettmer wrote on Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 02:10:16PM CET:
> > here we use doxygen to comment functions in the .h files.
> > When using "make tags", tags for the definitons but not for
> > the declarations are generated. In case of "own functions"
>
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> * Ralf Wildenhues wrote on 2010/01/30 00:34:17:
> > First off, `make -s' is both POSIX and portable.
> > Conceptually, `make -s' has nothing to do with the
> > `silent-rules' option that recent
>
> Exactly, and I am asking for autotools/li
* John Calcote wrote on Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 14:22 -0700:
> On 1/29/2010 10:17 AM, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
> >Why do passenger train windows have curtains?
>
> Okay - I can't help it! I bet the engineer's windows don't have
> curtains.
:-)
I think we have to accept that there are different require
