On Wed, 13.08.08 11:54, Daniel Macks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > For clarity and to simplify the makefile logic a bit, you might > consider putting everything for the gtk lib into a separate subdir > instead of lumped into src/ with the main lib. That way the top-level > Makefile.am can use HAVE_GTK to control whether the whole gtk dir is > used or not instead of being interspersed with the other lib in > src/Makefile.am. So Makefile.am does something like: > > if HAVE_GTK > gtk_src = gtk > endif > SUBDIRS = src $(gtk_src) doc libltdl > > and gtk/Makefile.am, which gets all the gtk parts of current > src/Makefile.am, gets > > AM_CPPFLAGS = -I$(top_srcdir)/src > > and use ../src/libcanberra.la to link to that lib. The two libs become > more compartmentalized (configure already proves they have independent > interface versioning) and src/Makefile.am and gtk/Makefile.am become > specific to just one lib each.
If I understood your proposal correctly you are suggesting adoption of recursive make for building binaries and libs? I dislike recursive make with a passion, I consider it a feature if a build system doesn't use recursive make. Also see "Recursive Make Considered Harmful": http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ For most of my newer projects I adopted some kind of hybrid scheme: use recursive make for building docs and stuff seperately, but build binaries from a single Makefile. And that's how I did it in libcanberra, too. That avoids most of the problems you get by using recursive make, but still keeps some things seperate. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553 http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4 _______________________________________________ libcanberra-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/libcanberra-discuss
