Re: [Tuxpaint-devel] [Fwd: Bug#300632: tuxpaint: FTBFS: Changed header files.]

[Bill K. <nb...@so...>]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 07:46:56PM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> I believe we added header detection because it was a common problem for
> users to forget to install the dependencies.

#1 most FA'dQ I've seen.  "I installed SDL, but it won't compile!"
(It's due to the fact that libraries like SDL and friends are separated
into separate packages for the 'runtime' stuff (object files), and the
'compile-time' stuff (headers, documentation))


<snip>
> I'll hack my way around it now (probably just by disabling the checks)
> so I can remove this RC bug against tuxpaint as soon as possible, but
> I'd like to know what you guys think our permanent fix should be.
<snip>

As mentioned, we have stuff like this, now:

  #if !defined(_SDL_TTF_H) && !defined(_SDLttf_h)

which seems to cover the schizophrenia that the SDL header files have been
going through as they mature. ;^)

Does THAT not work?


<snip>
> > The proper way to do this would be to have a configure script
> > that could then give an error message.

Ack! No! ;^)

Or, if so, whoever creates it will need to become adopted by my wife and
I and live in our spare bedroom, so that when stuff stops working, I'm
not stuck. ;^)


Anyway, if it comes to it, I suppose we can just remove the checks.
I was TRYING to be friendly, but SDL*.h went and broke things out from
underneath me. ;^)

-- 
-bill!
bi...@ne...         "I'm anticipating an all-out tactical
http://newbreedsoftware.com/      dog-fight, followed by a light dinner."