[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: improve INSTALL contents

From: Alfred M. Szmidt
Subject: Re: improve INSTALL contents
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 09:51:42 -0400

   >    +Depending on the package, the default directory layout chosen during
   >    address@hidden can be altered during subsequent execution of
   >    address@hidden  
   > A `make install FOO=VAL' should never alter anything in the build
   > directory.  The problem is if you pass --bindir=/foo to configure, and
   > then do `make install prefix=/bar', the files installed in bindir will
   > be installed in /foo, and not /bar as the user might have exepcted;
   > this is why passing prefix to `make install' is a bad idea.

   Agreed - which is why I went on to say this in the same paragraph:

   +However, some programs need to know at
   +compile time where files will be installed, so the user should ensure
   +that the same directory choice is made for both @samp{make all} and
   address@hidden install}.

   Any suggestions on how to improve the wording to make this point
   more explicit?

I will try to think of something--please give me a day or two, I don't
like the current wording since it indirectly contradicts the GCS, and
is very unclear.  

Thanks for mentioning V=0 and --disable-silent-rules, I didn't know
about that!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]