[PATCH weston] configure.ac: honour the wayland-scanner.pc

[Bill Spitzak]

On 02/10/2015 06:42 AM, Emil Velikov wrote:
> Currently we use the wayland-scanner executable as found with
> AC_PATH_PROG, and after that check the presence of wayland-scanner.pc
>
> Even if the latter is pointing to another wayland-scanner we silently
> ignore it. Rework things to check for the relevant variable in the *.pc
> file first, and then fall back to checking via AC_PATH_PROG.
>
> XXX: Should we just drop the AC_PATH_PROG check altogether ?
>
> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov at gmail.com>
> ---
>   configure.ac | 10 ++++++++--
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> index 1db9f79..ee08cfc 100644
> --- a/configure.ac
> +++ b/configure.ac
> @@ -501,9 +501,15 @@ if test "x$have_lcms" = xyes; then
>   fi
>   AM_CONDITIONAL(HAVE_LCMS, [test "x$have_lcms" = xyes])
>
> -AC_PATH_PROG([wayland_scanner], [wayland-scanner])
> +PKG_CHECK_MODULES(WAYLAND_SCANNER, [wayland-scanner],
> +	wayland-scanner=`$PKG_CONFIG --variable=wayland-scanner wayland-scanner,
> +	wayland-scanner='')
> +
>   if test x$wayland_scanner = x; then
> -	AC_MSG_ERROR([wayland-scanner is needed to compile weston])
> +	AC_PATH_PROG([wayland_scanner], [wayland-scanner])
> +	if test x$wayland_scanner = x; then
> +		AC_MSG_ERROR([wayland-scanner is needed to compile weston])
> +	fi
>   fi

I would prefer using the else clase of PKG_CHECK_MODULES rather than 
this strange x$foo==x stuff.

>   PKG_CHECK_MODULES(WAYLAND_SCANNER, wayland-scanner)

Looks like you left a redundant PKG_CHECK_MODULES there at the end, or 
you should merge whatever it does into your existing one.