Build system quirks

From: Calvin Arndt (calarndt@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 13:34:03 EST

  • Next message: Andrzej Pruszynski: "How to create a hyperlink to external document in AW?"

    This applies to cvs...
    autogen.sh uses two completely different build styles depending on
    whether or not the configure option --with-wmf is included

    here is the script I use

    #! /bin/sh

    ./autogen.sh

    ./configure --disable-nls \
                 --prefix=/usr \
                 --enable-extra-optimization \
                 --with-libjpeg \
                 --with-libwmf

    When I do that I get a resultant dir tree structucture that has the abi
    bins under the /usr/AbiSuite/bin
    toplevel looks like this
    /bin
    /AbiSuite

    when I remove the --with-libwmf from the configure options... I get an
    expected tree structure of:

    /bin #with abi bins in here
    /share #abidist files here...

    As I said the builds go completely different:

    the latter one does the normal (__expected__) GNUmakefile which when
    making, displays each full gcc command as it is executed...

    The former gives me some comment about

    [LicensedTradeMarks:OFF....Gnome:OFF...} as make enters each dir

    but only the filename is displayed as it is compiled:

    ev_Unix~~~.cpp:
    ev_Unix~~~.cpp:
    ev_Unix~~~.cpp:
    ev_Unix~~~.cpp:

    Both methods come up with working bins (they load and exec properly)

    However using the former methods results in both _d and _s bins being
    exactly the same size and and the latter the _s is always larger than
    the _d (which is what i would have expected from both)

    I use ~conf 2.52 and ~make 1.4

    Is this what would be expected by you, or am I all full of water?

    also when I add --enable-gnome I don't get a gnome binary I get a gtk
    bin...?
     

    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
    http://sports.yahoo.com/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Mar 19 2002 - 13:34:07 EST