From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Dec 21 10: 1:56 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from squall.waterspout.com (squall.waterspout.com [208.13.56.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A70F237B419; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:01:51 -0800 (PST) Received: by squall.waterspout.com (Postfix, from userid 1050) id 64B959B19; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:59:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:59:39 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: dima@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Question about pilot-link port Message-ID: <20011221125939.M73815@squall.waterspout.com> Reply-To: Will Andrews Mail-Followup-To: Maxim Sobolev , dima@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org References: <3C232B78.FC903DDF@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C232B78.FC903DDF@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 02:30:48PM +0200, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Is there a reason why the pilot-link maintained by you installs its > files into ${PREFIX}/pilot, but not into ${PREFIX} directly? This > complicates usage of this port in dependent ports, as well as requires > from a user to tweak his PATH in order to use binaries installed by > it. Not even to mention that its pkg-plist should be extended to > automatically run ldconfig after installation in the case when its > installed via a pre-built package. > > What do you think about converting it to use more common prefix > settings? I rewrote it a few weeks ago to respect PREFIX; however, I also had this question but decided to leave it up to the maintainer. I also think it should be installed in PREFIX directly. -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message