Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I should have said that (at least when using CMake) it runs configure > in a temporary directory, not in ~/.lyx. But this does not address
That might work actually. Not that all (my) problems end with this. > But how do you know if it's properly installed unless you do a make > check? I see -- by properly installed you don't mean that it > necessarily runs properly, just that the files are in the right Yep, installing here means more than running make install, we install fonts which needs specific handlers, there are specific tex handlers spellcheck dict handlers, python handlers. At the end you have in your hands something different than vanilla structure in temporary directory. > I thought that the most common thing to do was > > make > make check # the point of this is to check that the program runs > correctly in the build directory > make install > > What is the point of make check then? It depends what we make it :) I argue for keeping it simple and stupid. Up to 2.0 it was just some object testing of selfcontained binaries - float conversions, filenames and similar (frankly I have my doubts about usefulness of them but anyway). The problem with LyX is that we depend on so many different beasts that it's very difficult to say what is mandatory and what just optional, other distros have different dependecies and sometimes it's even your choice when installing. How make check should know about this. On my distro it's not even predictable what python you have under your hands by default "python" call and specific machinery is called in postinstall phase to convert them (that means the python scripts are no more the same which you tried to run with make check) etc. > I think it is possible to cover many (OK, I agree not all) distros. I don't see any manpower to do such thing. Frankly we have hard time to even find someone who has time to release the tarballs. Pavel
