Bugs item #1888979, was opened at 2008-02-07 12:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gk4 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=103382&aid=1888979&group_id=3382
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: George Kraft IV (gk4) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: implement DESTDIR in Makefiles Initial Comment: It is customary to implement DESTDIR in Makefiles. I would like to be able to execute the following: make DESTDIR=/opt/ibm/ltp install I believe automake would have set this up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: George Kraft IV (gk4) Date: 2008-02-18 15:29 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4500 Originator: YES > investigate and create a new RPM package that is fine with me for my immediate needs; however, you are still left with cruddy Makefiles in LTP proper. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Subrata (subrata_modak) Date: 2008-02-18 01:24 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1737361 Originator: NO Let this be a Integrated approach to raised Bugs nos. 1888979, 1888996, and 1888999. I agree that any developer should be able to develop test cases independently using USCTEST APIś and PAN, and, should not get burdened with having to download the entire test suite to get the services of LTP Libraries and PAN. I personally do not want to destabilize the present LTP tree structure to do this. Instead i will go ahead, investigate and create a new RPM package, which will install the LTP libraries, PAN and any other necessary tool on the system folders, so that users can compile and run their own test cases standalone. And this RPM package will be released as part of regular LTP releases. I hope this can solve problems pointed out by George to great Extent. Mike, Nate, George, what is your suggestion on this ?? Regards-- Subrata ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Nathan Straz (nstraz) Date: 2008-02-12 10:59 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=200873 Originator: NO I think it's a fine idea to split up LTP into smaller, more reusable parts. Having everything in one giant blob makes it hard to pull out parts which are useful on their own. I would like to see the libraries and test driver (pan) used in other projects. I don't think people understand the cool things you can do with pan when it is hidden behind runltp. I also thing the whole Makefile system in LTP could use an overhaul. I'd be willing to spend some time on it since I've learned a lot more about GNU make since LTP started out. But before we do that we need to gather what people want out of a new build system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Mike Frysinger (vapier) Date: 2008-02-11 18:45 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=114429 Originator: NO there is no barrier. fetch the latest source, build it, and then build your code against it. external projects should post their code to the ltp list for integration. it isnt hard at all to get things folded back in. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: George Kraft IV (gk4) Date: 2008-02-11 13:24 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4500 Originator: YES All or nothing is a barrier for developers to write new test cases using USCTEST in preparation to include in LTP. I don't want to deal with the entire LTP bundle for me to write new tests that may or may not be included in the upstream LTP. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Mike Frysinger (vapier) Date: 2008-02-11 10:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=114429 Originator: NO switching ltp to automake really isnt desirable or needed ltp also isnt designed to be installed in the first place ... you build it up locally and run it many test cases need to be run by root in order to be useful at all which sort of defeats the purpose of it being a package in the first place standalone test cases should not exist ... they should be integrated into ltp proper ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: George Kraft IV (gk4) Date: 2008-02-07 12:56 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=4500 Originator: YES make install does not install anything, it just creates a bunch of symbolic links. The symbolic links in the build tree should be done during the normal "make" pass. make install should install in DESTDIR with the default being /usr/local/ It should install libltp, headers, runltp, and pan. I would like to be able to create a standalone LTP test case and be able to run it with what was previously built and installed. Ultimately I would like to have a rpm package of ltp. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=103382&aid=1888979&group_id=3382 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
