[Xcb] [Xcb-commit] image

[Jamey Sharp]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:21:54PM +0200, Vincent Torri wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010, Jamey Sharp wrote:
> >I'm not sure I understand. test_bitmap.c #includes test.xbm, so it's
> >much like a .h file for the test_bitmap program. Aren't header files
> >supposed to be listed in _SOURCES, or am I confused about automake
> >again?
> 
> _SOURCES are for files processed by gcc (or any compiler, depending
> on the file extension). What is the point of compiling a .h ?

I don't know, the automake documentation lists headers in _SOURCES, such
as in the first example for "Defining program sources":

hello_SOURCES = hello.c version.c getopt.c getopt1.c getopt.h system.h

It goes on to say that "Header files listed in a _SOURCES definition
will be included in the distribution but otherwise ignored."

In "Building Libtool Libraries" the manual explains that "Headers listed
in the [_SOURCES] should be internal headers that are not part of the
public interface."

Overall my impression remains that _SOURCES is the conventional way to
do this. It has the advantage of keeping all the files needed for
building one program listed together in one place.

Jamey
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xcb/attachments/20100624/50ebb7b6/attachment-0001.pgp>