> On 9/9/06, André Detsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Shouldn't we have two variables, like $goboPrefix _and_ >> $goboCrossPrefix? >> Its look like to me we are at this moment using a same variable for >> two different purposes, and they conflict sometimes (like in the >> report made by Dan). > > Actually we already have $cross_prefix_dir, specified in > Cross-ARCH.conf. The idea of using $goboPrefix was that we could use > much of the infrastructure already created for Rootless, as in the end > the problem is almost the same: dealing with programs and files in a > different prefix. > >> Having these two variables available, we could probably use something >> like $goboPrefix/$goboCrossPrefix/<path> in many places, instead of > > That's more tricky, as $cross_prefix_dir might be outside the user's > home dir in the case of Rootless. I'm not sure about which alternative > is better in this case. Any suggestions are welcome, of course. > > The only problem I see on doing that is that we'll end needing to > touch and replicate tests everywhere. Just grep for goboPrefix inside > Scripts/Current to take an idea of the problem.
I have no idea what I'm talking about, but perhaps a better idea would be to add a goboRootlessPrefix (or maybe just goboRoot) variable. That way, those programs that needed to break out of the cross compilation prefix could use "$goboRoot/Files/Whatever" instead of "$goboPrefix/Files/Whatever," and then not have to unset goboPrefix. By default goboPrefix would equal goboRoot. When cross-compiling, goboPrefix would equal cross_prefix_dir... Just a thought. And again, I have no idea what I'm talking about. _______________________________________________ gobolinux-devel mailing list gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
