[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: chonfigure and glib-config
- To: developer at arabeyes dot org
- Subject: Re: chonfigure and glib-config
- From: Mohammed Elzubeir <elzubeir at fakkir dot net>
- Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 10:45:43 -0600
- User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 02:05:41PM +0100, Chahine M. Hamila wrote:
>
> I don't know Moe, you just informed me of pkg-config's existence:)
Ah.. it was designed 'supposedly' to get rid of the 'package-name'-config
structure to a 'pkg-config' type of thing. In any case, it is slightly more
flexible, but pretty much the same thing.
> Maybe for glib the package name is simply glib, I don't know, I don't have
> pkg-config.
http://packages.debian.org/unstable/devel/pkg-config.html
for Debian.
On my FreeBSD box, I don't have glib-config (I am running FreeBSD 4.4-STABLE
-- so my src tree is all up-to-date). It renamed glib-config to
glib-config-2.0 and that prints out a 'deprecated util' kind of message.
I installed pkg-config on arabeyes.org if you want to play with it.
> What we could do in the macros in that case is to test what a system uses. It
> would be simpler to write a function dedicated to locating pkg-config or the
> equivalent helper and reusing in the macros. I guess you read the glib.pl
> macro, it is trivial...
Well, glib-config traditionally is a tool for the autotools to use. Or at
least that's how I think of it, as a subset to the autotools. Now, if
glib-config is being dropped, there is no sense in supporting it.
>
> In any case, I'm seizing this opportunity to give a very brief description of
> the way chonfigure works in case someone out there would be interested in
> writing a more detailed "internals guide" or user guide for anyone who would be
> interested in writing macros for it, or better, extend it:
I did have a look at some of it. I am no Perl hacker so I am mostly reading
with my mouth open ;)
> - guess which source files are going to be automatically generated by swig or
> idl tools
This is Akka specific, right? I mean, in a stand-along 'chonfigure'
distribution, these parts would not exist, right? Instead they would replaced
by a framework for more generic purposes (or am I just not making sense?).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Mohammed Elzubeir | http://fakkir.net/ |
| Tech Support | http://www.arabeyes.org/ |
| College of Business Computing Center | Homepage: |
| University of North Texas | http://fakkir.net/~elzubeir/ |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------