On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:15:32 +0100
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What about packages with 'make install' scripts that do not respect
> the DESTDIR variable?
>
That may be the only problem.
The majority of packages, however, do include the DESTDIR variable.
For those small
>
> What about packages with 'make install' scripts that do not respect
> the DESTDIR variable?
add your own to the makefile. some makefiles use the variable
root_prefix, some have different names for what is functionally the
same as DESTDIR.
You can usually just add DESTDIR to the rules in the i
Hello,
What about packages with 'make install' scripts that do not respect
the DESTDIR variable?
Cheers.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:11 PM, Frank Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello LFS users,
>
> The easy management of installed software packages is always
> an important concern. After com
Hello LFS users,
The easy management of installed software packages is always
an important concern. After compiling, the "make install" command
does not help the user at all in knowing where the installed files
are located. The major Linux distributions have invented many types
of package manage
Alan Lord wrote:
>
> Oh I see. I never intended my post to suggest subsequent copying of
> files that way. Sorry if I badly worded the OP.
>
> The way I have used it [DESTDIR] is purely to allow easy inspection of
> the files the install process creates. If I am happy with what it does,
> the
DESTDIR is not used so very often outside the software written by the
more responsible people, like folks at FSF (who write most of GNU
software).
I am specifically referring to the myriad of software packages which
you, as a LFS user will be compiling to run in userspace after you are
done with t
DJ Lucas wrote:
> /usr/share/info/dir is most common, until you get past X, and get into
> gconf, desktop file utils, etc. But yes, make install *can* and does
> modify existing files. Simply copying from the DESTDIR to the final
> destination will result in a broken system (though it's proba
Simon Geard wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 09:24 +, Alan Lord wrote:
>> That's interesting. Do you mean that DESTDIR actually affects the
>> contents of some files when you run "make DESTDIR=/my_path install"?
>>
>> I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it merely changed the
>> destination
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 09:24 +, Alan Lord wrote:
> That's interesting. Do you mean that DESTDIR actually affects the
> contents of some files when you run "make DESTDIR=/my_path install"?
>
> I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it merely changed the
> destination path for the "root" of th
DJ Lucas wrote:
> The disadvantage is that if you move from the DESTDIR, you have to be
> aware of things like the info dir, gconf updates, .desktop or icon
> additions, etc. Pretty much any update to an existing file will have to
> recreated manually. In the end, this is probably much better
Alan Lord wrote:
> Alexander Haley wrote:
>
>> Basically, the fundamental thing that bugs me is ... I type 'make
>> install' and scads of files arrive on the file system ... and I really
>> don't quite know their role, purpose or importance ... Do I really
>> need to know the purpose of each and e
Alexander Haley wrote:
>
> Basically, the fundamental thing that bugs me is ... I type 'make
> install' and scads of files arrive on the file system ... and I really
> don't quite know their role, purpose or importance ... Do I really
> need to know the purpose of each and every library file that
Alexander Haley wrote:
> Basically, the fundamental thing that bugs me is ... I type 'make
> install' and scads of files arrive on the file system ... and I really
> don't quite know their role, purpose or importance ... Do I really
> need to know the purpose of each and every library file that is
13 matches
Mail list logo
