Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Please add pkg-config support for use with GNU AutoTools (was #237 not merged by mistake?) #297

Open
loren-osborn opened this issue May 7, 2024 · 13 comments

Comments

@loren-osborn
Copy link

🤔 What's the problem you're trying to solve?

GNU AutoTools refuses to identify cucumber-cpp as installed because it doesn't install .pc files. There was a PR for this (#237) in 2019 that appeared to have been approved for inclusion, but never got merged into main. Was this PR discarded in error?
/

✨ What's your proposed solution?

Either

⛏ Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?

I could write my own upstream *.pc files, but this seems like an inferior solution to including them upstream.

📚 Any additional context?

I'm really looking for an explanation of why #237 was closed, and if it was closed in error.

@loren-osborn loren-osborn changed the title Please add pkg-config support for GNU AutoTools support (was #237 not merged by mistake?) Please add pkg-config support for use with GNU AutoTools (was #237 not merged by mistake?) May 7, 2024
@mpkorstanje
Copy link
Contributor

Was this PR discarded in error?

Looking at the timeline, it seems this PR was closed when the default branch was renamed from master to main. So an unintended side effects I assume.

While I'm not the maintainer of this project, I imagine it would speed things along if you could recreate the pull request.

@mpkorstanje
Copy link
Contributor

Also closed in error

And I'm surprised it's only one other.

@loren-osborn
Copy link
Author

I'm not sure If I understand cucumber-cpp quite well enough to do that yet. The PR does appear to be missing a direct dependency on pthreads that I'm testing locally at the moment.

@loren-osborn
Copy link
Author

Also closed in error

And I'm surprised it's only one other.

Good catch

@mpkorstanje
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not sure If I understand cucumber-cpp quite well enough to do that yet.

Ah that's unfortunate.

I'm afraid I know just enough CPP and CMake to be dangerous. So I can't really help. But I hope other people than me can comment on the specifics.

@loren-osborn
Copy link
Author

As per the README.md, I tried to move the discussion here: https://community.smartbear.com/discussions/cucumberos/cpp-pkg-configgnu-autotools-support/264750

@mpkorstanje
Copy link
Contributor

mpkorstanje commented May 8, 2024

I think those instructions are out of date. I can't imagine anyone reading the SmartBear forums. And for context https://mattwynne.net/new-beginning.

@ursfassler
Copy link
Contributor

As mentioned, this seems to be an error. I will look into it soon.

@ursfassler
Copy link
Contributor

In the PR #237 the cucumber-cpp version is hard coded in the file src/cmake/cucumber-cpp-nomain.pc.in and src/cmake/cucumber-cpp.pc.in. I'd like to get this version from git and only from git to reduce a source of errors.
Unfortunately we then run into the problem of not doing it correctly when it is build from the source archive. We have to solve this anyway for #295.

@ursfassler
Copy link
Contributor

@loren-osborn do you mean that pthread is missing within the src/cmake/cucumber-cpp.pc.in file?

@ursfassler
Copy link
Contributor

@loren-osborn The link to the discussion group is fixed with #299

@loren-osborn
Copy link
Author

@loren-osborn do you mean that pthread is missing within the src/cmake/cucumber-cpp.pc.in file?

I saw the CMake macro for linking in a threading library, and didn’t see a cooresponding package “Requires:” specification… that isn’t to say that such a line is necessary… I don’t know… that’s why I didn’t volunteer to do this myself.

@loren-osborn
Copy link
Author

loren-osborn commented May 9, 2024

I'd like to get this version from git and only from git to reduce a source of errors

I think industry best practice for this is to actually have one single copy of the version number somewhere in the source so that the project, including its version number, can remain buildable from a tarball. I fully agree, if git is detected, that the build system should verify that the version tag sanely corresponds to the indicated version, but should robustly handle pre-tagged scenarios and interim builds. (I’ve worked on mechanisms like this before if you need help.)

(UPDATED: clarified wording)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants