Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 May 2002 09:30:09 +0930
From:      Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Why don't we search /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/include by default?
Message-ID:  <20020529093009.C31668@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020528084248.B59588@dragon.nuxi.com>
References:  <20020528143444.R16567@wantadilla.lemis.com> <20020528084248.B59588@dragon.nuxi.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 28 May 2002 at  8:42:48 -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 02:34:44PM +0930, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>> I've just had a question from some friends in the Linux space about
>> why we install additional libraries in /usr/local/lib and their header
>> files in /usr/local/include, but gcc by default only searches
>> /usr/local/libexec and /usr/local/lib for libraries and /usr/include
>
> The system GCC searching any part of /usr/local is a bug.  It is not
> [ports] PREFIX clean.

So how would you recommend we solve the issue?

> (you have typos above about /usr/local/libexec don't you?)

Yes, sorry.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020529093009.C31668>