Re: Symlinking to gnome-common

[John R Sheets <dusk smsi-roman com>]

Tom Tromey wrote:

> John> Is it perfectly safe to use the same copy of the intl, macros,
> John> and support directories for all gnome packages, and just put
> John> symbolic links to it from each project?
>
> It should work, but don't complain if it doesn't.

Well, I noticed that it puts project-specific versions of Makefile.in,
etc. in the common directories (which happened to be in my gnome-libs).
Since I didn't want to have to worry about mutating Makefiles, I removed
the symlinks and copied the directories over explicitly.  Oh well.

> `support' should only be part of gnome-libs, not anything else.

That's good to know.  I'll try removing it.  I think it's still a part
of the gnome-standalone project template that Frater Reklaw put together
(thanks, Frater, it's coming in real handy!), so maybe it should be
removed from that, too.

Incidentally, has anyone had any linking problems with using the
gnome-standalone?  I keep coming up with undefined references for just
about every function call when it tries to link into the main app's
executable (i.e. the last step).  I'm probably just doing something
stupid.  Any suggestions?

> Eventually I might make that true of `intl' as well.

That would be very nice.  The thinner the packages, the better,
especially when they reside outside cvs, and you have to tar 'em up to
distribute them.  Hate to ask people to copy directories around like
that (i.e. "...then grab the macros and intl directories from
gnome-libs, wherever it is, and copy them--yes, go ahead--to wherever
you untarred this distribution...").  (c:

Thanks, Tom

John