Randy McMurchy wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 12/06/05 08:22 CST: > > >>Randy, you said "I'll make the changes." Specifically, which changes? >> Object dir? mozconfig? client.mk? > > For now, here are some thoughts I have so far. > > 1) Object dir? I can go either way on this. It doesn't benefit the > BLFS way of building one bit as we throw away the source dir as > soon as the package is installed. Additionally, the reasons you've > given for an object dir, don't really come into play for BLFS.
Just a note to say that we use the 'objdir' method when building X. We are also fundamentally using it in LFS with glibc and binutils. I'm not advocating a method for Moz/FF/TBird, but just noting what is done elsewhere. > 2) Mozconfig and client.mk to me are mutually together. If you use > one, you should use the other. As is mentioned in the Mozilla build > instructions (yes, it does say this), you can use mozconfig/client.mk > or configure to create the end Makefile used by the make command. > I see no reason not to go that route (mozconfig/client.mk) if that is > what the community wants. As Tush mentioned, that is how it was but > he changed it many years ago so that the instructions were similar to > other BLFS instructions. > > If this is not desired any longer, we should change as that is what > is suggested by the Moz developers. (yes, I realize that you'll be > able to find at least *one* spot in the Moz build instructions that > says they recommend to use an object dir as well. However, do note > the reasons they say that *and* there are references to not using > the object dir also) One suggestion to use most of the recommended method would be to cat > mozconfig/client.mk and go from there. > 3) Creating a "distribution" tarball and then installing from this > probably won't happen unless there is some compelling technical > reason that this is better than using 'make install'. And, to me, > having a tarball around so that you can install on another machine > or in a different directory on the same machine is not a compelling > technical reason as this is somewhat contrary to BLFS philosophy > of build-it-yourself-and-install-in-a-global-area. Agree. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
