On Apr 7, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Andreas Volz wrote: > I did the initial port to Autotools because more as one year ago > mapnik didn't build with Debian out of the box. I had to create many > boost symlinks by hand.
Yes, :) > Maybe that was because I was doing something > wrong. Yes, boost library names are pretty complex and our SCons implementation for finding them (needed and) has improved quite a bit. However, autodetection of boost library names when boost has been installed from source (and the install process did not create any symlinks) still could benefit from improvement and I plan to work on this in trunk before 0.7.0. > Another reason was the support for pkg-config that the rest of > my builds use. BTW, we are now commonly using built in pkg-config support with Scons to locate a number of dependencies. > Also the pkg-config --uninstalled function that allows > to link again libraries in place without installing them. This saves a > lot of time. Hm, I'm unfamiliar with this. > Now as I did the port to Autotools I don't like to throw > it away. Many distributions use the ./configure && make && make > install > way to easy create packages (e.g. gentoo). > I agree, and I'm glad you've started documenting it. > But I don't like to vote against scons. If you don't like to switch > I'll be happy if you simply let the autotools files in SVN for me. Cool. So I guess we just need to remove the Autotools stuff when we package releases. Dane _______________________________________________ Mapnik-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-devel
