----- Original Message ----- From: "Gareth Pearce" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 6:34 AM Subject: Re: patches to vendor source trees - discussion
> > Secondly, IMO setup.exe should _ask_ where the source should go, not > > extract into /usr/src. The rpm way, at this point, becomes a hinderance. > > (How many CYGWIN directories do you want hanging around?). > > I think I just changed my mind... > I now support #3 ... under the following condition > > that the setup 'ask where to install' allows support for an option called > 'in subdirectory by name' which takes the src package name and unpacks it in > a directory under the directory specified, named by taking the tarball and > going from start of name till first - or . (probably -). So that I could > then put that as my default - and be happy. I'll accept patches for this. IMO it's unneeded, but I've no objection as long as it's not the default option. > That combination thus allows for #3 and #4 in one. Yep. > Although I do think that some sort of standard for the name of directory > where built things are put, relative to the install directory, would be > good. Which #1 #4 but not #3 have ... as far as I can remember. #3 does - they get build under the source tree. I.e. in .build and .install. Rob
