Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 08:42:48 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <dev-null@NUXI.com> To: "Greg 'groggy' Lehey" <grog@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Why don't we search /usr/local/lib and /usr/local/include by default? Message-ID: <20020528084248.B59588@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20020528143444.R16567@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@FreeBSD.org on Tue, May 28, 2002 at 02:34:44PM %2B0930 References: <20020528143444.R16567@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. (you have typos above about /usr/local/libexec don't you?) 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?20020528084248.B59588>