Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:47:18 +0400 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ATTENTION: is the way DESTDIR was introduced completely wrong? Message-ID: <44E16DF6.20705@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060814234414.GA57035@hades.panopticon> References: <20060814234414.GA57035@hades.panopticon>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dmitry Marakasov wrote:
> What I propose is:
> - Change variable naming scheme.
> All *BASE and *DIR vars should be reverted to their original meanings
> (i.e. local paths). Instead, INSTALL_ vars should be introduced:
> INSTALL_LOCALBASE=${DESTDIR}/${LOCALBASE}
> INSTALL_X11BASE=${DESTDIR}/${X11BASE}
> INSTALL_PREFIX=${DESTDIR}/${PREFIX}
> INSTALL_DATADIR=${DESTDIR}/${DATADIR}
>
> etc. These should be used in do-install target.
>
> * This is far more clean and understandable,
> * This allows us to make all ports (around 5k) that define do-install target
> DESTDIR-compatible (there still may be issues, but nevertheless).
>
I agree with every your word.
> - Introduce variable DESTDIR_COMPATIBLE to explititely mark
> DESTDIR-compatible ports.
> * I don't think DESTDIR compatibility can be tested automatically, so
> this would make freebsd user's life easier (user will be sure that after he
> installs ports into [jail|other freebsd installation mounted via
> nfs|locally] being set corresponging DESTDIR, nothing will break).
> Without such variable, he'll never be sure.
> * Port maintainers will know what ports still are to be converted.
> Nothing will be forgotten.
>
This is exactly I proposed. But I've not been heard.
--
Dixi.
Sem.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44E16DF6.20705>