On 5 Jul 2001, Thayne Harbaugh wrote:

> I'm just not understanding why ggi_libdir must be introduced unless you
> are looking for a $(libdir)/$(ggi_libdir) combination similar to
> $(sysconfdir)/$(ggi_confdir) which is different than what it seems you
> are describing.

This is because of not changing $(libdir) and $(sysconfdir) in the
Makefile -files.

But see my other mail on the list (Subject: "Re: pattern issues to
solve (was: Re: IA64)").

 
> On 05 Jul 2001 12:15:03 +0200, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 4 Jul 2001, Brian S. Julin wrote:
> > 
> > > Hmmm... well when it does get fixed take care that this
> > > ${prefix} should be "" if --prefix=/usr was given, otherwise we
> > > end up with /usr/etc/ggi which is not right.
> > > 
> > > Also, the conf files now have .root: ${exec_prefix}/lib/ggi
> > > 
> > > ...this looks new to me -- is that supposed to be like that, or
> > > should that ${exec_prefix} have been subbed?
> > 
> > Yes. It MUST be subbed, because the ${exec_prefix} pattern breakes
> > the parsing code in libgg.
> > 
> > We must reintroduce the @ggi_libdir@ in order to get the full
> > directory again.
> > 
> > We must evaluate $libdir twice times:
> > 
> > eval foo="$libdir"
> > eval ggi_libdir="$foo"
> > 
> > because "libdir" contains ${exec_prefix} and evaluating the first
> > time gives us ${prefix}. The second evaluating gives us the directory
> > we want to have then.
> > 
> > The .root: entry in the conf files must be a valid directory entry,
> > because loading of the sublibs fails as they are not in a default
> > search path of the dynamic library loader.
> > 
> > So I am going to reintroduce the @ggi_libdir@ now.
> > 
> > 
> > CU,
> > 
> > Christoph Egger
> > E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> -- 
> Thayne Harbaugh
> 
> Your eyes are weary from staring at the CRT.  You feel sleepy.  Notice how
> restful it is to watch the cursor blink.  Close your eyes.  The opinions
> stated above are yours.  You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
> 

Christoph Egger
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to