[ghemical-devel] automake and MPQC ; Makefile.include ok?

[Tommi Hassinen]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Michael Banck wrote:

> Another thing: Did you try adding @SC_CPPFLAGS@ to libghemical_CPPFLAGS?
>
> This is from the automake manual:
>
> `INCLUDES'
>      This does the same job as `AM_CPPFLAGS' (or any per-target
>      `_CPPFLAGS' variable if it is used).  It is an older name for the
>      same functionality.  This variable is deprecated; we suggest using
>      `AM_CPPFLAGS' and per-target `_CPPFLAGS' instead.

Hi,

both INCLUDES and AM_CPPFLAGS work, but libghemical_CPPFLAGS does not. And
including the lines is not necessary.

> > Generally, is there an option in configure-scripts or somewhere else that
> > one can use to select whether a static or a dynamic library is used if
> > both of them are available? If there is one could just use something like
> >
> > 	./configure --enable-mpqc --use_libghemical.a
> >
> > when configuring the ghemical app.
>
> I'm not aware of such a thing. By default, dynamically linked
> executables are produces on GNU/Linux I think. Other systems might have
> other defaults, this is why libtool exists, which knows about this.
>
> You can add -static to the libfoo_LDFLAGS (perhaps conditionally) to get
> static linking I think, but this will link in everything.
>
> Another possiblity would perhaps be to just specify the libSC*.a to
> libghemical_la_LDFLAGS and make sure the shared SC libraries do not get
> included in @LIBS@. This would get messy rather soon though I guess.

I thought more about the error message that I got from the shared
libraries, and I noticed that there must be *some* parts of the SC code
present/available, but apparently not all. This is because the error
message really comes from SC code, since it is not a standard error
message and I have not either written such error message code.

So perhaps not all of SC is included?

I must have seen a program which can examine an executable and print out
all libraries that it uses. Do you remember the name of such a program? I
thought I could compare static and shared versions of the ghemical
executable and perhaps so find out what is missing.

Thanks for the other feedback as well, I start looking it.

Regards,

	Tommi