Config files for frameworks (Was: KArchive for Qt4)

[Stephen Kelly]

Alexander Neundorf wrote:

> On Tuesday 18 December 2012, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
>> > yes, but forgot to answer.
>> > No strong reason here. The options containing "HAVE" are based on
>> > whether that thing existed on the system where the library was built.
>> > This one is independent on whether udisk2 existed on that system, so I
>> > thought "USE" might be better.
>> > I might also use "USE" for all those options...
>> 
>> Ah, actually I misread the comment. I thought the udisks2 one was about
>> using the 'system' udisks2.
> 
> Sorry, what do you mean exactly with the "system udisks2" ?

That was a brain-fart. I was thinking along the lines of how Qt can be built 
with a system zlib or a bundled one. We can ignore this suthread I think.

>  
>> We've used HAVE for variables like this before, right? Is that the common
>> way?
> 
> I think the "HAVE" is typically for stuff which exists or not.
> The cmake option is called "WITH_SOLID_UDISKS2", it can be set by the
> user, independent whether udisk2 is used on the current system or not. So
> HAVE sounds slightly wrong to me. Except if interpreted as "the installed
> solid has support for udisk2".

That's how I interpret it. I'd also rename the option from 
WITH_SOLID_UDISKS2 to SOLID_USE_UDISKS2 or so, but we don't need to bikeshed 
that.

Thanks,

Steve.