Tushar Teredesai wrote:
On 11/28/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Or, to look at it another way, folks that *do* want to use the DESTDIR
approach can simply add it to the instructions. :-)
I have been using that approach and it is not as easy as that.
Sometimes, we need to make sure that the destination dirs exist before
installing (i.e. have some install -d before the make DESTDIR=..
install.
Every package README shows the instructions as
configure
make
make install
Why do we want to make it different than the maintainer suggests?
That is what the README says and as we know the documentation always
lags:) As per the documentation we should having been using gcc-2.95
to compile the kernel for a long time after we stopped it:)
Additionally, most of the distros do it the way that I mentioned for
the technical reasons that I gave in my proposal. You do want to be
able to upgrade glibc on a live system, right? :)
I kind of like using DESTDIR for a package manager, but it really
doesn't belong in LFS IMO. Nor do I use it for package management
anymore, however, I do use it when evaluating package contents and
installtion sizes for BLFS.
Also, just to throw a bone in the mix, :-) there is no need to use
DESTDIR nowadays for a glibc upgrade as the libs are installed to a temp
file and then pivoted into the new location safely. In fact, glibc does
not recomend DESTDIR at all. 'install_root' is the alternate
installation prefix nowadays. I didn't look at the makefiles to see if
DESTDIR is still supported.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
