� wrote:
FYI, I have rewritten the Gem build system for my debian packaging, a patch against 0.90 is attached. I haven't checked if it works with the CVS version, but in general it should be a lot cleaner than the
well, it did not apply too cleanly against the CVS....
anyhow, after i managed to patch the tree, i have some questions: - i get an error with PKG_CHECK_MODULE which i don't like very much (but it seems to work)
- are options generally a bad style ("--without-ftgl") or are they missing just because you didn't care ? should we re-do them ? has the way they have been used been dirty (i am not much of a autoconf-hacker) ??
- what about the "strange hacks" ? i can compile Gem against standard debian-ffmpeg for quite some time (against the shared libs!), why do we need such weird tests ?
- most important: is there a way to use "-config"-scripts with autoconf ? e.g. avifile comes with an "avifile-config"-script which gives you the needed flags for compiler & linker: ffmpeg comes with one too; i do think we should use these scripts (as they probably know best what is needed)
- shouldn't the script fail when not finding hard dependencies (e.g. openGL) ?
- is it good to calculate the compiled files on the fly ? i mean, this is certainly ok for a packager who assumes, that all the files compile fine; but during development process it is often convenient if i can in/exclude files from being build. (ok that is a rather simple thing to fix)
- is there any good reason to not use libdv ? (i guess this is because of the missing dv1394.h-file in both libdv4-dev and gem-0.90.0 ???
apart from that, it is surely cleaner (at least: shorter) than the old script. and it compiled fine
mfg.a.dr IOhannes