On Wednesday 18 March 2009 15:46:08 Tushar Teredesai wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Frank Peters <frank.pet...@comcast.net> wrote: > > The problem, I strongly feel, is in the make program itself. > > For some reason, the developers of the standard GNU build > > sequence, that is "./configure, make, and make install," did > > not choose to create an install log for the user after the > > final step. The make program will simply write all files to > > disk without creating any nice and neat record of what it is > > doing. Considering the critical importance of knowing where > > all the files are located, I can't understand why an install > > log provision has ever been left out. > > Because that goes against the Unix developer mentality.
And that is one of the problems with programers regardless what software or OS. I understand they do things for speed and brevity but for people coming behind them it makes learning difficult. > Providing > an "checkinstall" Providing a "checkinstall" ;) > style functionality is not the purpose of make. > According to the man page: "The purpose of the make utility is to > determine automatically which pieces of a large program need to > be recompiled, and issue the commands to recompile them." > > What you mention as critical is only for critical for a LFSer. I disagree, some users even on distros might want to know this information. > > -- > Tushar Teredesai > mailto:tus...@linuxfromscratch.org > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/ -- http://www.wowgreen.net/11324 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
