[GRASS5] GRASS-header-file locations changed?

Radim Blazek radim.blazek at gmail.com
Tue Feb 14 07:16:11 EST 2006

On 2/14/06, Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com> wrote:
> > The external packages are using --with-grass only,
> > not --with-grass-includes/libs.
> That's a bug.

Why? GRASS installs everything in GISBASE.
--with-grass is path to GISBASE.

> > I still believe that it is a wrong approach to make compilation of
> > other packages with GRASS support more difficult than it was before.
> So GRASS' is obliged to install itself according to the demands of
> third-party packages?

It breaks compilation for many people. Why we cannot
support both places untill updated GDAL/QGIS will be available?
It does not cost anything, until now there were 2 copies of header
file and it was not problem.

> The existing layout is wrong; GRASS should be able to be installed
> into /usr/{bin,lib,include,share} just like every other package.
> Installing headers directly into /usr/include isn't practical, due to
> the number of files and the fact that some of them have very common
> names (e.g. bitmap.h or colors.h).

Of course, I agree, that was the reason for the change.

> Like other sizeable packages, headers should go into their own
> subdirectory, and the subdirectory should be used in #include
> statements, as with <X11/Xlib.h>, <GL/gl.h> etc (PostgreSQL doesn't do
> this, and it's responsible for a significant proportion of
> configure-related queries to this list).

Should PostgreSQL follow demands of third-party packages?


> --
> Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>

More information about the grass-dev mailing list