Problem with configure

Michael McConnell michael at vocalscape.com
Sat Apr 29 09:02:41 UTC 2000


TAKE ME OFF THIS FUCKING MAILING LIST!


Michael McConnell wrote:

> TAKE ME OFF THIS FUCKING MAILING LIST!
>
> Michael Mueller wrote:
>
> > W. Tasin wrote:
> >
> > > Hmmm... and now to the problem, what do you want to do with a define in
> > > the gcc-call??
> > >
> > > Where is the difference between having it in a header file (which is
> > > created by autoheader/autoconf) and with a -D switch and for what is
> > > this define good for (is it only for developing purpose?)?
> > >
> > > The problem is the conflict in the shell and make substitution.
> > >
> > > Use for the KDevelop options -DSOMEPATH='\"/foo/bar\"', so you will have
> > > the desired result.
> > >
> > > But I don´t agree with this version, if you want to distribute this
> > > DEFINE.
> > > The compiler-switch inserted in KDevelop will not be exported to the
> > > distribution, so
> > > calling make from the console wouldn´t set the define.
> > >
> > > So later you would have to patch either acconfig.h and/or configure.in,
> > > if you wanted to give the DEFINE also to the user of your product.
> >
> > In fact, the define comes from an environment variable which has to be set at compile
> > time and is used to construct pathnames for directories (executables, temporary files and
> > configuration files). So actually, the option would have to be
> > -DSOMEPATH="${PATHVARIABLE}", but I first tried the simpler version without the
> > environment variable and came to that problem. The environment variable is set
> > differently for different products and for debug and release versions. A similar
> > construct is used to bring a version string into the compiled software.
> > Maybe I should note that we are currently investigating whether to use KDevelop for
> > porting a large package of legacy software to Linux. I never had to deal with configure
> > before using KDevelop, so I don't know much about it. May be it doesn't make sense for us
> > to use configure, since it makes no sense to distribute our software because it can only
> > be used together with very expensive hardware which only we build and sell. But KDevelop
> > by default uses configure and so I first tried to do it this way. May be we will use
> > KDevelop with only ordinary makefiles.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Michael





More information about the KDevelop mailing list