review FindENCHANT.cmake

[Yury G. Kudryashov]

Alexander Neundorf wrote:

> On Friday, September 16, 2011 08:47:52 PM Yury G. Kudryashov wrote:
>> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > 
>> > same as with many others:
>> > 
>> > * unnecessary shortcut at the top
>> > * unnecessary if() around the pkgconfig stuff
>> > 
>> > Otherwise, it looks fine I'd say.
>> 
>> enchant installs its headers to $prefix/include/enchant by default. Thus
>> the current code will not find enchant unless pkg-config information is
>> available.
> 
> Ah, hmm, that's not good.
Sorry, I've missed PATH_SUFFIXES enchant while writing the previous message.
> 
>> Another question: should we force users to add
>> $enchant_prefix/include/enchant to include_dirs(), or find_path( ...
>> enchant/enchant++.h ...), and leave the decision whether to include
>> $enchant_prefix/include or $enchant_prefix/include/enchant to the user?
> 
> For many packages the package itself determines in which way its headers
> must be included. That's not the case for enchant ?
> 
> What does pkgconfig returns as include dirs ?
> Maybe we should then go for the same.

includedir=${prefix}/include

Cflags: -I${includedir}/enchant

So, yes, FindENCHANT.cmake is OK.
-- 
Yury G. Kudryashov,
mailto: urkud at mccme.ru