On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 07:30:32PM +0200, Jens Seidel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 07:26:50AM -0700, Daniel Burrows wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 02:22:29PM +0200, Jens Seidel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > was heard to say: > > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:13:55AM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel > > > (faw) wrote: > > > I suggest you build the package from source to ensure that something as > > > #483620 doesn't happen again. I added mine-help-??_??.txt to the > > > Makefile and your file is also installed but aptitude detected the > > > package root wrong when installing into an arbitrary directory. So > > > I tested it only partly. > > > > Hm, you should be able to configure with --prefix to point aptitude > > at another directory. Did that fail for you? > > No, I installed into /home/jens/local/test via --prefix and started > aptitude via /home/jens/local/test/bin/aptitude. Now it complains that > /usr/local/share/aptitude/aptitude-defaults cannot be opened. Shouldn't > aptitude determine the installation prefix from $0 via $(dirname $0)/..?
No -- the prefix is built in at compile-time. That's pretty standard for autoconf/automake-based programs; many of the components of the installation can be moved around from ./configure, so there's no guarantee about where they'll end up. The installation directories don't even have to be under $prefix. I usually use "xstow" to manage local installations of aptitude, so that it's easy to clean up later. It would be nice if aptitude looked in the vicinity of $0 for a source directory, so you could run it from where it was built without having to install it, but I think that would be tricky to get right (files are loaded in a number of places and they'd all have to be tracked down and overridden). Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
