On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:34:06AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 03/19/2012 10:31 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:14:54AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > >>On 03/19/2012 09:47 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > >>>This series change the Makefile to use $(confdir) instead of > >>>$(sysconfdir)/qemu, and allows the full config path configurable instead of > >>>forcing the use of $(sysconfdir)/qemu. > >> > >>What's the use case here? Is this to allow $(sysconfdir)/qemu-kvm? > > > >Yes. On RHEL we usually package qemu-kvm only, but we try to avoid > >conflicts in case other flavors of qemu be provided by third-parties > >(read: EPEL). > > > >> > >>I'd rather we use a PACKAGE_NAME define to do that and have qemu-kvm > >>change PACKAGE_NAME. > > > >I tried to mimic --mandir, --datadir, --docdir, and all other options > >that expect full paths instead of trying to building one itself. > > > >A --package-name option could be provided to make it easier to override > >all the defaults at the same time, but I don't see why not include an > >option to define the full path for confdir, just like we allow for > >datadir, docdir, and mandir. > > No, I'm not suggesting --package-name, I'm suggesting that qemu-kvm > would carry a patch to configure that changed a fixed PACKAGE_NAME > define.
Are you really suggesting that forcing downstream to carry a patch is better than having a configure option? If you suggest making it configurable using a variable on the 'make' command-line it would be OK, but I kind of hoped that no modern software project would ever require packagers to use configure-by-sed methods to set build parameters. -- Eduardo
