On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Benoit Chesneau <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sunday, October 3, 2010, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 3 Oct 2010, at 00:20, Benoit Chesneau wrote: >> >>> Let me try again. I know I can set the /var/run directory. That's not >>> what I want. I want to be able to set separately this path. I don't >>> see any reason against it. Why not having this possibility ? >> >> Same reason we don't let configure set the location of any other specific >> file. You can set it from the INI configuration. I don't understand the use >> case that makes this advantageous. > > I want to be abble to provide good defaults in packages I distribute. > Distributing!= Configuring, not the same persons, not the sale > business.I don't think my usecase is so isolated. Think for example > about people embedding their couchdb but still want to set this path > in a common place, without allowing configuration. With current way i > can't do it without previously patch the ini file. for me this path is > like setting a socket path. This is setting something that could be > use by external applications. So something that need in my opinion > some grunlarity in packaging. > > Now rather than discussing , I think we need a vote on this. > > -benoit >
I think what Noah is saying is that ./configure doesn't have the ability to set *any* paths, so what makes this particular file more special than every other path specified in the ini files? I'd have to agree with Noah that I don't see a reason to make this particular file path specifiable at ./configure time. I think you can still provide good defaults by distributing packages with modified configuration files. HTH, Paul Davis
