[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: improve INSTALL contents

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: improve INSTALL contents
Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 10:59:34 -0500 (CDT)

On Fri, 15 May 2009, Eric Blake wrote:

What about packages that don't support arbitrary prefix override
(all those using current libtool), or packages or systems that don't
support DESTDIR installs?  This wording creates problems for them.

Indeed - I want to be very clear in INSTALL that there are some basics
that pretty much any client of this file provide (make, make install), and
some options that nice packages provide but which may fail if someone
borrowed this file but does follow everything checked by automake's
distcheck (whether or not they use automake).  Would it be better to put

What about the second part of Ralf's comment to the extent that some operating systems don't support DESTDIR installs? A package may be very nicely prepared and pass 'make distcheck' under Linux yet not work as expected with DESTDIR on some other operating environment (presumably those which hard-code install paths, or for which libtool --mode=finish is really needed).

Bob Friesenhahn
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,

reply via email to

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