aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/packaging.cli
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorBoris Kolpackov <boris@codesynthesis.com>2023-11-06 13:59:40 +0200
committerBoris Kolpackov <boris@codesynthesis.com>2023-11-06 13:59:40 +0200
commit3ca163fa8eba1a73dc5a166d057bd7229b676c9f (patch)
tree321f493c65e046c1bba606236b0abb4a278a9706 /doc/packaging.cli
parent0589bd639ec6312c37f65d95253863da8cb30c6a (diff)
Further work on packaging guide
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/packaging.cli')
-rw-r--r--doc/packaging.cli68
1 files changed, 64 insertions, 4 deletions
diff --git a/doc/packaging.cli b/doc/packaging.cli
index 3ccd4b6..ada96ed 100644
--- a/doc/packaging.cli
+++ b/doc/packaging.cli
@@ -816,7 +816,7 @@ project include:
\dl|
-\li|\n\c{no-version}
+\li|\n\cb{no-version}
Omit the auto-generated version header. Usually upstream will provided its own
equivalent to this functionality.
@@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ since upstream may add it in a future version and you may end up with a
conflict. Instead, work with the project maintainer to rectify this in
upstream.||
-\li|\n\c{no-symexport}\n\c{auto-symexport}
+\li|\n\cb{no-symexport}\n\cb{auto-symexport}
The \c{no-symexport} sub-option suppresses the generation of the DLL symbol
exporting header. This is an appropriate option if upstream provides its
@@ -840,12 +840,72 @@ support in the existing build system. It is also recommended that you give
this functionality a try even if upstream does not support building
shared libraries on Windows.|
-\li|\n\c{binless}
+\li|\n\cb{binless}
Create a header-only library template. See \l{#dont-header-only Don't make
library header-only if it can be compiled} and
\l{https://github.com/build2/HOWTO/blob/master/entries/make-header-only-library.md
-How do I make a header-only C/C++ library?}||
+How do I make a header-only C/C++ library?}|
+
+\li|\n\cb{buildfile-in-prefix}
+
+Place header/source \c{buildfile}s into the header/source prefix directory
+instead of include subdirectory. To illustrate the difference, compare these
+two auto-generated layouts paying attention to the location of \c{buildfile}s:
+
+\
+$ bdep new ... --type lib,split libfoo
+$ tree libfoo/
+libfoo/
+├── include/
+│   └── foo/
+│   ├── buildfile
+│   └── foo.hpp
+└── src/
+ └── foo/
+ ├── buildfile
+ └── foo.cpp
+\
+
+\
+$ bdep new ... --type lib,split,buildfile-in-prefix libfoo
+$ tree libfoo/
+libfoo/
+├── include/
+│   ├── foo/
+│   │   └── foo.hpp
+│   └── buildfile
+└── src/
+ ├── foo/
+ │   └── foo.cpp
+ └── buildfile
+\
+
+Note that this sub-option can only be used if both the header and source
+directories (\c{include/} and \c{src/} in our case) have an include
+subdirectory (\c{foo/} in our case).
+
+Why would we want to do this? The main reason is to be able to symlink the
+entire upstream directories rather than individual files. In the first
+listing, the generated \c{buildfile}s are inside the \c{foo/} subdirectories
+which mean we cannot just symlink \c{foo/} from upstream. This can be such a
+strong motivation that it may make sense to invent an include subdirectory in
+the source directory even if upstream doesn't have one. See
+\l{#dont-main-target-root-buildfile Don't build your main targets in root
+\c{buldfile}} for details on this technique.
+
+Another reason we may want to move \c{buildfile}s to prefix is to be able to
+handle upstream projects that may have multiple such include subdirectories.
+While this situation not very common in the header directory, it can be
+enountered in the source directory of more complex projects where upstream
+wishes to seperate the source code into components.||
+
+@@ Terminology does not match bdep-new 'include subdirectory'. Maybe change
+in bdep-new? 'source prefix directory' and 'source subdirectory' are quite
+close. But then include subdirectory inside src sounds like an oxymoron.
+I believe this is also consistent with Canonical Project Structure.
+
+@@ 'Don't build your main targets in root buldfile' needs work.
Continuing with our \c{libfoo} example, assuming upstream provides own symbol
exporting, the final \c{bdep-new} command line would be: