Date: Sat, 22 Apr 1995 16:02:36 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@freefall.cdrom.com> To: jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr (Jean-Marc Zucconi) 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: <6311.798591756@freefall.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 22 Apr 95 17:31:39 BST." <9504221631.AA14078@cabri.obs-besancon.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Are you crazy guys? This change implies that PREFIX can't be set to
> anything different from /usr/local. In this case it is even better to
> remove all references to PREFIX and replace them with /usr/local :-(
>
> This is a big step backwards!
Not actually..
Think about it, Jean-Marc..
What everyone's been doing up to now has been to put little rules like:
pre-install:
@mkdir -p ${PREFIX}/bin
@mkdir -p ${PREFIX}/lib
...
Into their Makefiles. Sure, they don't mention /usr/local directly,
but they're creating the _same underlying hierarchy_! So you redirect
your prefix to /usr/foo - you're STILL going to be expected to have
things like /usr/foo/lib and /usr/foo/man/man1!
All I did with the BSD.local.dist change was centralize this. It's
run for ALL values of ${PREFIX} except ${X11BASE}, which we know
follows a different structure and should already be created as part of
the XFree86 installation (if this turns out not to be the case then
we'll have to create an XFree86.dist or something!).
I don't see how this constitutes a step backwards at all. Sure
BSD.local.dist is inappropriately named in the case where
PREFIX=/usr/foo, but it certainly doesn't bother me enough to lose
sleep over.
Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6311.798591756>