dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 11:55:18AM +0200, Johan Jansson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 10:18:28PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote:
> > I have updated configure.ac (one line) so that a file dolfin.pc is now
> > automatically generated from dolfin.pc.in.
> > 
> > This file serves the same purpose as our script dolfin-config. This
> > script was modelled after gtk-config, but that was a while ago and
> > since then GTK, GNOME etc have moved to pkg-config, which is the
> > standard.
> > 
> > Here's how it works:
> > 
> >     dolfin-config --cflags   -->   pkg-config dolfin --cflags
> >     dolfin-config --libs     -->   pkg-config dolfin --libs
> > 
> > I have updated the Makefile in src/demo/pde/poisson, so please try it
> > out and see how it works. For this to work, you need to do
> > 
> >     export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=`pwd`
> > 
> > in the build directory. We'll need to fix so that dolfin-config gets
> > installed to the right location during make install.
> > 
> 
> Nice, the more standard tools we can use the better (less custom work
> for us).
> 
> > Some things to consider:
> > 
> > 1. pkg-config does not have any --compiler and --linker flags, but
> > maybe we can just replace these with g++ in the example Makefiles?
> 
> I'll take a look. Hopefully there's a way for pkg-config to provide
> extra information.
>
> > 
> > 2. We need to make this work with the build of PyDOLFIN. Johan, can
> > you see what might be missing?
> 
> I'll take a look.
> 
> > 
> > 3. What is our long-term plan for the build system? To continue with
> > autotools? Or should we move to Scons? I have suggested Scons earlier,
> > but I'm not as convinced as I used to be. I have seen Scons in use up
> > close in another project here at Simula and Scons seems to be able to
> > generate just as much headache as autotools.
> > 
> 
> Ok, too bad. I think autotools performs sufficiently well, so there's
> no crisis. If we decide to stick with autotools for the short term, I
> think there are some improvements we can do to the build system. I
> would like to look into a flat Makefile to simplify dependency
> construction for example. But it's not top priority, I guess we'll get
> there eventually.

What do you mean by flat Makefile?

/Anders