Re: building xcb without check

[Noah Misch]

On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 11:12:25AM -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> Personally, things that I ./configure and compile on my own I like to
> install into /usr/local/packages/<pacakge-version> and then use stow
> [http://directory.fsf.org/stow.html] to symlink those things into
> /usr/local/.... For this reason my check.m4 file ended up installed
> into /usr/local/share/aclocal, a location that is not checked by
> default by the aclocal program.
> 
> One way to fix this is to simply copy (as root) the check.m4 file into
> /usr/share/aclocal (a location that is checked by aclocal). Another
> solution is to pass the "-I" (capital i) flag to aclocal as in:

One can also add `/usr/local/share/aclocal' to `/usr/share/aclocal/dirlist'; see
the Automake manual.

> But what if the user really doesn't have CHECK installed and has no
> interest in installing it? I've been reading through the autofoo docs
> and I think I've found the proper solution. I've attached it as a
> diff. Could people with faster connections (who can pull down fresh
> xcb trees in seconds) please give this a whirl both with and without
> CHECK installed?

> The solution I'm trying is to use the m4_ifdef() macro. Note: if you
> don't have CHECK installed aclocal will still give a warning.

Traditionally, a developer generates `configure' and distributes it with
official releases of the package.  The developer cannot know whether users will
want to use an optional feature, like `check', so he or she always generates
`configure' with support for configuring all possible package features.

That said, there's not too much harm in this scheme if the developers who
prepare releases have a full set of macros.  If many of your developers use CVS,
the reduced set of prerequisites for CVS development may be a big win.