[Cook] relative include

[Jerry Pendergraft]

I would suggest/encourage putting the library source in the trunk of a
project and then have your other two projects be branches under it.
Much more simple. You have no such path issues *AND* you are not
duplicating the library source, with the resulting possibility of getting
out of sync.

-- 
Jerry Pendergraft                        jerry.pendergraft at endocardial.com
Endocardial Solutions                    voice: 651-523-6935
1350 Energy Lane, Suite 110                fax: 651-644-7897
St Paul, MN 55108-5254

On Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Aaron Denney wrote:

> This is a feature request:
> 
> It would be nice if there were some way to include a cook file, and
> automatically adjust the paths in the dependencies of any rules, so
> that they match up to where the files are from the point of view of
> the cookfile including the other file.
> 
> This would help in the following situation:
> 
> You have two projects that depend on a common library.
> Each can just then plop the library source down and include
> the cook fragment without having to modify it.
> 
> Some have aesthetic preferences for this way of including things for
> full-project builds, even when one knows the full path, so it isn't
> necessary.  I hear that jam and cons have this feature.
> 
> This can, of course, be done by transforming fragments outside
> of cook and using the #include-cooked mechanism, but this requires
> writing a parser for cook, which is not an entirely trivial project.
>