[ghemical-devel] automake and MPQC ; Makefile.include ok?

[Tommi Hassinen]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Michael Banck wrote:

> mpqc should just have a .pc file I guess.

The mpqc versions that I have used so far use not pkg-config but sc-config
which is a separate program/script. However, it works just like pkg-config
and all that query-related stuff already works fine both in the new
automake-based and in the old autoconf-based build system. So this is Ok.

> I'm currently
> again fiddling around with checking out CVS, because I can never figure
> out which branch I should look at :-/

In libghemical CVS there are no branches.

In ghemical CVS the branchname for the "1.5x" version related to
libghemical is BEFORE_BONOBO_BRANCH.

> > I found out that a one way to add something in Makefile.in with automake
> > is a Makefile.include file that is included at Makefile.am ; my
> > Makefile.include is
> >
> > 	INCLUDES += @SC_CPPFLAGS@
> >
> > that adds SC_CPPFLAGS into INCLUDES and eventually into CXXCOMPILE, which
> > is enough to make libghemical compile.
>
> I don't think you absolutely need to include this file, can't you just
> add the INCLUDES to Makefile.am directly?

Ok, actually it seems to work directly as well, without including.

> > Then, linking the final ghemical executable has some other issues. It
> > appears that only the static library has the MPQC code added ; perhaps
> > that is how the shared libs are inteded to work but now the executable
> > linked into libghemical.so won't contain all of the MPQC code.
>
> Hmm, I think the Debian ghemical package is linked dynamically to libsc,
> I'm not sure right now though.

Generally, is there an option in configure-scripts or somewhere else that
one can use to select whether a static or a dynamic library is used if
both of them are available? If there is one could just use something like

	./configure --enable-mpqc --use_libghemical.a

when configuring the ghemical app.

Regards,

	Tommi