Date: Sun, 23 Apr 95 03:59:05 +0100 From: jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr (Jean-Marc Zucconi) To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com Cc: asami@cs.berkeley.edu, jkh@time.cdrom.com, CVS-commiters@time.cdrom.com, cvs-other@time.cdrom.com Subject: Re: cvs commit: /host/freefall/a/ncvs/ports/lang/forth Makefile Message-ID: <9504230259.AA16999@cabri.obs-besancon.fr> In-Reply-To: <8069.798597977@freefall.cdrom.com> (jkh@freefall.cdrom.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> "Jordan" == Jordan K Hubbard <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> writes:
>> There is no problem if you have only one 'local' hierarchy, but what
>> if you want to install ports in several different locations? Of course
>> it is also possible to create a full tree for each location, but
>> creating 15-25 subdirectories when I only need /usr/foo/bin and
>> /usr/foo/man/man1 is not the best solution.
> I still don't think you understand.
I think I understand what you are doing, but I still disagree :-)
> pkg_add will create the complete hierarchy for you if you install a
> port package. I fully expect some part of the generic install
> framework to do the same thing (since we're trying to keep the
> behavior of `pkg_add' and `make install' in sync here, right?).
I still understand.
> Sure,
> the user probably gets a lot more directories in /usr/foo than they
> expected, but that's the breaks. I think the gain is worth it.
This is where we disagree: I prefer some redondant rules in a Makefile
to a lot of empty directories through my disk.
> Jordan
Jean-Marc
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Jean-Marc Zucconi | jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr
Observatoire de Besancon |
F 25010 Besancon cedex | PGP Key: finger jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr
=========================================================================
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9504230259.AA16999>