Re: [RFC] Remove tcl/tk/itcl/itk dependencies from Makefile.in

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 08:03:50PM -0800, Keith Seitz wrote:
>On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 19:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>Anyway, I've managed to build a version of gdb by removing TCL_DEPS,
>>TK_DEPS, ITCL_DEPS, and ITK_DEPS from the Makefile and I can kludge
>>something for my cygwin build system so that I can make this automatic.
>>I was just wondering if anyone would mind eliminating these
>>dependencies.
>
>You've built insight using "standard", installed versions of Tcl, Tk,
>Itcl?  THAT'S WONDERFUL!

I've built it using versions from a separate "build" area on cygwin.  I
haven't tried it with the installed version (/usr/lib, /usr/include)
since it seems to need internal include files that aren't normally
installed.  I didn't check this, though.

>> So, the question is: Is it ok to remove the tcl/tk/itcl/itk *_DEPS files
>> from the gdb Makefile?  This would also be a step in the direction of
>> allowing insight to be built from system tcl/tk libraries.
>
>Well, here's the idea I had in mind... We would like to support two
>building methodologies. One where we are using the tcl, tk, etc from the
>build tree and one where we use the installed versions.
>
>If we're building with the installed versions, there should be no
>dependency (obviously). If we're building tcl et al, then we should have
>the dependency.
>
>I believe that this can be done easily enough. My rough outline of the
>process looks something like: if --with-*config and it exists, use it.
>If not, assume build tree. If --with-tclconfig was specified and it
>exists, use that directory to search for *config.sh, too. Same for
>--with-tcl-headers and --with-tcl-library. I think this is what the
>likes of BLT use, and it seems a reasonable (if lengthy) approach.

Doh.  I was going to suggest just this scenario as an alternate plan in
my email and I forgot (sssuurrreee I did).  So, I agree this is a good
idea.

>Anyway, not to discourage, I think that I would check if I could find a
>suitable Tcl, Tk, etc in the build tree and then set TCL_DEPS and
>TK_DEPS accordingly, even if the --with-* stuff isn't in yet.
>
>Does this sound like a reasonably way to inch forward?

Yes.

I'll probably poke around a little and see what would be required to get
something like this into the current configury.  In my "copious spare
time" of course.

<side track>
Chuckle.  Get it?  I don't really have "copious" spare time but I used
that adjective anyway.  It's just so hilarious that it bears repetition.
In fact, I think we should make it an English-language requirement that
the term "spare time" cannot be used without wryly adding "copious" in
front of it.

This is just like one cannot type "Windows" anymore.  You have to say
"Windoze" or "Winblows" or "Window$".  It was mildly humorous once, so
the 100,000th repetition must make it hilarious...
</side track>

cgf