Es schrieb Raja R Harinath: > > You can usually use the following command to generate something more > FHS compliant > > ./configure --prefix=/usr \ > --sysconfdir=/etc \ > --infodir=/usr/share/info \ > --mandir=/usr/share/man > > However this is not always right. FHS may require some of the > binaries be installed in /bin and /lib rather than /usr/bin and > /usr/lib, etc. > > All in all, it is better not to use 'configure'/'make install' to > manage your system binaries but use some kind of packaging system. >
correct, ... and at the same time, inconvenient for the quick builds when carrying a tarball of my projects around. It should be then just configure/make/make-install even for win32-target where the files should go under /programs, and it for quite some unices a different scheme about /opt packs is virulent. I hacked up a macro for that, but as noted above, it's use it not recommend - it just happens to be there ;-) http://ac-archive.SF.net/guidod/ac_set_default_paths_system.html by the way, to be FHS compliant with a single prefix-system is a very hard task - manpages go to /usr/local/man but /usr/share/man when under /usr. The /usr-packages should put their configs into /etc, and the /opt packages use /var/opt for localstatedir. And therefore, there is not ONE prefix + x * subdirs system that will exactly match FHS guidelines - it should be left to the local packaging system to set the paths to where it should go. The only thing I want to raise my voice again - please add a generic docprefix where all these docprefix/{man|info|help|html} files can be put under, nuke manpath/infodir in the distant future. pleeeeeease.... cheers, -- guido Edel sei der Mensch, hilfreich und gut GCS/E/S/P C++$++++ ULHS L++w- N++@ d(+-) s+a- r+@>+++ y++ 5++X- (geekcode)
