> Yes. The thing we do (... ;-) is to have a very small (hand written) > 'configure' script which locates gnustep-make and writes a small > 'config.make' files containing the relevant GS variables. Then all > makefiles include that config.make file like this: > > -include config.make > include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/common.make > > If configure was run, it works w/o an environment. If it wasn't, it > still works when GNUstep.sh is sourced. Which is quite nice IMHO ;-)
Sounds like an interesting solution. Then people would be able to do ./configure make make install and all would work with no variables defined. I think there is a smarter solution though ... if the approach is giving small fragments/snippets of code that people include in their project, then why not write directly a makefile fragment ? So we could have a small makefile fragment, let's call it find-gnustep.make, that searches for gnustep-make on disk and sets GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES to the best match. I'll write that makefile fragment, and it will be maintained inside gnustep-make. If you put/copy that makefile fragment in your project, then you could modify your GNUmakefiles to do -- include ./find-gnustep.make include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/common.make ... then you can type 'make' and it would always work, even if GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES is not initially defined ;-) Hmm. > BTW: personally I'm not quite sure whether I understand that /etc/ > GNUstep.conf thing :-) Is it necessary or optional? It is necessary. The reason is that it allows gnustep-make and gnustep-base to have a common understanding of where the various directories are. The GNUstep.conf file describes the GNUstep filesystem and both gnustep-make and gnustep-base read it to know where to find things. Previously this shared understanding was based on shell variables set by GNUstep.sh; now we prefer a configuration file. ;-) Thanks _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list Gnustep-dev@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev