Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
lgtm
New version is much nicer. Suck about the crashing bug in pkg-config. =(
Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> New patch: Use pkg-config instead. Much simpler.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>
>> I haven't done pkg-config stuff yet. Maybe check in on #autotools in
>> freenode. I'm usually there, as are other people.
>> Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>>
>>> Yeargh, I'm behind the times. pkg-config? I guess I should be
>>> integrating with that rather than writing my own script?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>>>
lgtm
42 Packages which depend on Protocol Buffers should call this script
automatically 43 as part of their own configure script.
Provide an example with PKG_CONFIG or something like that.
Otherwise, looks good. Thanks!
Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> (New patch set uploaded.)
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey
>> wrote:
>>
>>> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled,
>>> so I sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
>>> Anyhow, a few comments:
>>>
>>> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS?
>>> I think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>>>
>>
>> The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
>> installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The
>> automake
>> docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which
>> is
>> what we want here (since configure generates it).
>>
>>
>>> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell
>>> script to catch errors early on.
>>>
>>
>> Oops, fixed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" !=
>>> ""; then
>>>
>>> Should those all be @pre...@?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. :/
>>
>>
>>> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>>>
>>
>> Changed to "&& test".
>>
>>
>>> Same for this line:
>>>
>>>
>>> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false;
>>> then
>>>
>>
>> Done.
>>
>> Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS
>> are traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do
>> this.
>>
>> Also also, I expanded the help text.
>>
>> Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since
>> I doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
>> against official releases which have no suffix).
>>
>
>
>>>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
New patch: Use pkg-config instead. Much simpler.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> I haven't done pkg-config stuff yet. Maybe check in on #autotools in
> freenode. I'm usually there, as are other people.
> Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>> Yeargh, I'm behind the times. pkg-config? I guess I should be
>> integrating with that rather than writing my own script?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> lgtm
>>>
>>> 42 Packages which depend on Protocol Buffers should call this script
>>> automatically 43 as part of their own configure script.
>>>
>>> Provide an example with PKG_CONFIG or something like that.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, looks good. Thanks!
>>>
>>> Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>>>
(New patch set uploaded.)
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>
>> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled,
>> so I sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
>> Anyhow, a few comments:
>>
>> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS?
>> I think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>>
>
> The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
> installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
> docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which
> is
> what we want here (since configure generates it).
>
>
>> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script
>> to catch errors early on.
>>
>
> Oops, fixed.
>
>
>>
>> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" !=
>> ""; then
>>
>> Should those all be @pre...@?
>>
>
> Yes. :/
>
>
>> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>>
>
> Changed to "&& test".
>
>
>> Same for this line:
>>
>>
>> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>>
>
> Done.
>
> Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
> traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
>
> Also also, I expanded the help text.
>
> Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
> doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
> against official releases which have no suffix).
>
>>>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
I haven't done pkg-config stuff yet. Maybe check in on #autotools in
freenode. I'm usually there, as are other people.
Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> Yeargh, I'm behind the times. pkg-config? I guess I should be integrating
> with that rather than writing my own script?
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>
>> lgtm
>>
>> 42 Packages which depend on Protocol Buffers should call this script
>> automatically 43 as part of their own configure script.
>>
>> Provide an example with PKG_CONFIG or something like that.
>>
>> Otherwise, looks good. Thanks!
>>
>> Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>>
>>> (New patch set uploaded.)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so
> I sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
> Anyhow, a few comments:
>
> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS?
> I think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>
The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which is
what we want here (since configure generates it).
> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script
> to catch errors early on.
>
Oops, fixed.
>
> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != "";
> then
>
> Should those all be @pre...@?
>
Yes. :/
> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>
Changed to "&& test".
> Same for this line:
>
>
> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>
Done.
Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
Also also, I expanded the help text.
Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
against official releases which have no suffix).
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
Yeargh, I'm behind the times. pkg-config? I guess I should be integrating
with that rather than writing my own script?
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> lgtm
>
> 42 Packages which depend on Protocol Buffers should call this script
> automatically 43 as part of their own configure script.
>
> Provide an example with PKG_CONFIG or something like that.
>
> Otherwise, looks good. Thanks!
>
> Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>> (New patch set uploaded.)
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>>>
*sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so
I sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
Anyhow, a few comments:
Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS? I
think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>>>
>>> The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
>>> installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
>>> docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which is
>>> what we want here (since configure generates it).
>>>
>>>
You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script
to catch errors early on.
>>>
>>> Oops, fixed.
>>>
>>>
*73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != "";
then
Should those all be @pre...@?
>>>
>>> Yes. :/
>>>
>>>
Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>>>
>>> Changed to "&& test".
>>>
>>>
Same for this line:
*79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>>>
>>> Done.
>>>
>>> Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
>>> traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
>>>
>>> Also also, I expanded the help text.
>>>
>>> Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
>>> doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
>>> against official releases which have no suffix).
>>>
>>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
lgtm
42 Packages which depend on Protocol Buffers should call this script
automatically 43 as part of their own configure script.
Provide an example with PKG_CONFIG or something like that.
Otherwise, looks good. Thanks!
Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> (New patch set uploaded.)
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>>
>>> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so I
>>> sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
>>> Anyhow, a few comments:
>>>
>>> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS? I
>>> think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>>>
>>
>> The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
>> installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
>> docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which is
>> what we want here (since configure generates it).
>>
>>
>>> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script to
>>> catch errors early on.
>>>
>>
>> Oops, fixed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != "";
>>> then
>>>
>>> Should those all be @pre...@?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. :/
>>
>>
>>> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>>>
>>
>> Changed to "&& test".
>>
>>
>>> Same for this line:
>>>
>>>
>>> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>>>
>>
>> Done.
>>
>> Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
>> traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
>>
>> Also also, I expanded the help text.
>>
>> Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
>> doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
>> against official releases which have no suffix).
>>
>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
(New patch set uploaded.)
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
>
>> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so I
>> sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
>> Anyhow, a few comments:
>>
>> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS? I
>> think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>>
>
> The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
> installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
> docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which is
> what we want here (since configure generates it).
>
>
>> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script to
>> catch errors early on.
>>
>
> Oops, fixed.
>
>
>>
>> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != "";
>> then
>>
>> Should those all be @pre...@?
>>
>
> Yes. :/
>
>
>> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>>
>
> Changed to "&& test".
>
>
>> Same for this line:
>>
>>
>> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>>
>
> Done.
>
> Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
> traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
>
> Also also, I expanded the help text.
>
> Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
> doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
> against official releases which have no suffix).
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Bailey wrote:
> *sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so I
> sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in.
> Anyhow, a few comments:
>
> Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS? I
> think that might cause it to get looked at twice.
>
The purpose of putting it in bin_SCRIPTS is to make sure that it is
installed, which configure is not going to do automatically. The automake
docs say that bin_SCRIPTS are by default not included in the dist, which is
what we want here (since configure generates it).
> You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script to
> catch errors early on.
>
Oops, fixed.
>
> *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != "";
> then
>
> Should those all be @pre...@?
>
Yes. :/
> Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case.
>
Changed to "&& test".
> Same for this line:
>
>
> *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then
>
Done.
Also, I added --ldflags as a separate option since LDFLAGS and LIBS are
traditionally separate. Not sure why gtk-config itself does not do this.
Also also, I expanded the help text.
Also^3, I made --version strip the suffix ("-pre", "rc1", etc.) since I
doubt anyone will correctly parse it otherwise (since people will code
against official releases which have no suffix).
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Add a protobuf-config script like the old gtk-config
*sigh* It looks like the version at appspot.com isn't GA+ enabled, so I sign in and it thinks I'm not signed in. Anyhow, a few comments: Since it's generated by configure.ac, do you need it in bin_SCRIPTS? I think that might cause it to get looked at twice. You should pretty much always do a set -e at the top of a shell script to catch errors early on. *73* if test "@prefix@" != /usr -a "@prefix" != / -a "@prefix" != ""; then Should those all be @pre...@? Also, I think test -a might be a bashism in this case. From a handy cheat sheet on bashisms (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DashAsBinSh): While dash supports most uses of the -a and -o options, they have very confusing semantics even in bash and are best avoided. Commands like the following: [ \( "$foo" = "$bar" -a -f /bin/baz \) -o ! -x /bin/quux ] should be replaced with: (([ "$foo" = "$bar" ] && [ -f /bin/baz ]) || [ ! -x /bin/quux ]) Same for this line: *79* if test $full_library = true -o $explicit_library = false; then Jeff Bailey >|< Google, Inc. >|< +1 514 670-8754 On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 9:23 PM, wrote: > Reviewers: jeffbailey, > > Description: > This seems needed due to confusion about dependencies, pthreads, etc. > I'm not entirely familiar with the conventions for these scripts, > though. Did I do it right? > > Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/98071 > > Affected files: > M Makefile.am > M configure.ac > A protobuf-config.in > > > --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
