On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
Yes, in the current "normal" LFS, this config.site file can be really used for --prefix=/usr only. But let's move forward. There's no /usr/info, /usr/doc and /usr/man compatibility symlinks in FHS 2.3, and LFS still has
I thought that I had FHS 2.2 printed out but, alas, I only have a hardcopy of 2.1. Still, those directories aren't in 2.1 or 2.2 either. So what's changed?
them. In order to remove them, we must add --mandir and --infodir to each package (and thus teach people bad habit of typing long commands when shorter ones work), or use config.site.
We've not needed to use those before except in a few special cases. Why are they so significant now?
Even if they are needed, though, I think it's important to stay with ./configure options. ./configure is a very important part of learning how to build packages on Linux. Moving everything into a config.site file will take away from that exposure and, in the mind of a new user, move ./configure farther and farther into the procedural background much like "make" and "make install" are now.
I agree that a config.site can be useful but I also feel that it's more appropriate for BLFS.
Steven -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
