The LFS book in "Symlink Style Package Management" (6.3.2.3) mentions that make DESTDIR=/usr/pkg/libfoo/1.1 install would work, except that not all packages come with a Makefile supporting DESTDIR. However, with GNU stow we can do something like make install prefix=/path/to/stow/foo and then stow -t /path/to/targetfs foo
This wouldn't be dependent on a Makefile being well-behaved (am I wrong with this?) (http://blog.danieroux.com/2005/08/07/using-gnu-stow-to-manage-source-installs) I just found out about stow. It just seems too good to be true. So: did I misunderstood something? Any gotchas that are not obvious? For example, would it be reasonable to install binutils+gcc+glibc the usual way (in Ch. 6) and then all the rest via stow? Any corner cases that stow cannot deal with adequately? Would it build an enormous forest of symlinks? (That is, would it require too much space? I know disks are huge, but still...) In case someone has experience with stow, past or current, I would like to know your impressions before investing time on stow. Thanks Jorge Almeida -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
