[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: suggestions about AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR

From: Lorenzo Bettini
Subject: Re: suggestions about AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 10:30:37 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090409)

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hi Lorenzo,

* Lorenzo Bettini wrote on Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 09:20:05AM CEST:
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Lorenzo Bettini wrote on Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 08:15:01PM CEST:

Yes I know, and these are those files; I was thinking of distributing since my macro (for my library) relies on boost regex, so I wanted to check also for boost regex library inside my macro
You are correct in that you should have those files in your source tree,
and it is fine if you distribute them in your package tarballs, but
since your package is not the principal owner of these macro files, you
should not *install* them.  That's the crucial difference.

So, instead of the two lines quoted above, it would be ok to write
  EXTRA_DIST = ax_boost_base.m4 ax_boost_regex.m4

However, in case you are using these macros in your anyway,
then automake will already take care of adding them to your distribution
tarball anyway, even without the EXTRA_DIST line.

but if I don't install them, then the users that want to use my macro will have to get the additional files themselves, and that would make my macro for my library useless at that point, wouldn't it?

In what way is that different from installed third-party header files?
You wouldn't install them with your package either, but still require
their presence on your users' systems.

You're right about the headers, but installing a few macro files is more convenient than installing a whole library ;-)

however, I think I can solve this with pkg-config anyway


Lorenzo Bettini, PhD in Computer Science, DI, Univ. Torino
ICQ# lbetto, 16080134     (GNU/Linux User # 158233)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]