[gdal-dev] include paths and cmake

Dan Homerick danhomerick at gmail.com
Fri Nov 4 11:18:45 EDT 2011

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 6:06 AM, David Burken <dburken at comcast.net> 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 to me.   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.  I hope that makes sense.  Many
> packages separate the includes in their source tree, e.g. geos, ossim,
> opencv.  The source tree includes mirror the installed include tree.  So
> it's less complicated and this makes for easy installs / uninstalls.
> Dave

I'm in favor of not flattening the include paths in the installed
version, for just the reasons that Dave listed. In my experience,
making the installed paths different than the source tree has little
added value for the user, while adding developer headache. The user
doesn't generally need to include very many files, and those files
tend to be near the root of the tree anyways.

- Dan

More information about the gdal-dev mailing list