Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Dan Homerick
2011/11/4 Mateusz Łoskot : > On 4 November 2011 13:06, David Burken wrote: >> If you move the includes around on the install then >> it complicates the include paths when building against the code tree versus >> building against an installed version > > The headers location is already different fo

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Even Rouault
Le vendredi 04 novembre 2011 21:10:41, Mateusz Łoskot a écrit : > On 4 November 2011 13:06, David Burken wrote: > > If you move the includes around on the install then > > it complicates the include paths when building against the code tree > > versus building against an installed version > > The

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Mateusz Łoskot
On 4 November 2011 13:06, David Burken wrote: > If you move the includes around on the install then > it complicates the include paths when building against the code tree versus > building against an installed version The headers location is already different for installed and repo source tree. O

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Garrett Potts
Hello All: Either way should work with frameworks. The typical is something of the form: collapsed: gdal/ but this is fine as well not collapsed: gdal/…./someheader.h the one that is not collapsed will require a custom cmake process to make the directory structure in the gdal.framworks.

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Dan Homerick
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:06 AM, David Burken wrote: > Keeping the sub directories allows you to develop off checked out code base > with one include path.  You could do that with flattened path but you would > have to move the headers in your code tree.  I'm all for that but it's > really not up t

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread Garrett Potts
Hello All: For include paths of the form gdal/cpl_config.h would lead easier to do MAC Framworks where one can create a gdal.framework and use the gdal/ convention. Take care Garrett On Nov 3, 2011, at 5:24 PM, David Burken wrote: > Mateusz, > > Just wondering if you've thought about namespa

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-04 Thread David Burken
On 11/03/2011 09:15 PM, Daniel Morissette wrote: Personally I like the idea. I'd probably go for the flattened version unless there is a good reason to carry a bunch of sub-directories around. If there are any serious arguments against doing this then I'd like to hear them. Daniel Keeping

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Daniel Morissette
Personally I like the idea. I'd probably go for the flattened version unless there is a good reason to carry a bunch of sub-directories around. If there are any serious arguments against doing this then I'd like to hear them. Daniel On 11-11-03 05:31 PM, Mateusz Łoskot wrote: On 3 November

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Mateusz Łoskot
On 3 November 2011 22:05, Even Rouault wrote: > Le jeudi 03 novembre 2011 22:33:38, Mateusz Łoskot a écrit : >> On 3 November 2011 21:26, Kyle Shannon wrote: >> > I believe that is on the 2.0 changes list, or something along those >> > lines.  See: >> > >> > http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/GDAL20

[gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Even Rouault
Le jeudi 03 novembre 2011 22:33:38, Mateusz Łoskot a écrit : > On 3 November 2011 21:26, Kyle Shannon wrote: > > I believe that is on the 2.0 changes list, or something along those > > lines. See: > > > > http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/GDAL20Changes > > > > under House Keeping issues > > Grea

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Mateusz Łoskot
On 3 November 2011 21:26, Kyle Shannon wrote: > I believe that is on the 2.0 changes list, or something along those lines.   > See: > > http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/GDAL20Changes > > under House Keeping issues Great news! Frank, Even, Can I set http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/3435 with 2.0

Re: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Mateusz Łoskot
On 3 November 2011 21:24, David Burken wrote: > > Just wondering if you've thought about namespacing the include paths?  That > is: > > #include "cpl_config.h" > #include "gdal_frmts.h" > > Becomes: > #include > #include > > Or (flattened): > #include > #include David, I thoroughly agree. He

RE: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread Kyle Shannon
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 3:24 PM To: gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org Subject: [gdal-dev] include paths and cmake Mateusz, Just wondering if you've thought about namespacing the include paths? That is: #include "cpl_config.h" #include "gdal_frmts.h" Becomes: #include

[gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

2011-11-03 Thread David Burken
Mateusz, Just wondering if you've thought about namespacing the include paths? That is: #include "cpl_config.h" #include "gdal_frmts.h" Becomes: #include #include Or (flattened): #include #include This would make installs / uninstalls cleaner. Say your install prefix is: /usr/local