On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 02:10:13PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 2. September 2004 10:16 schrieb Fabien COELHO:
> > (1) "make intall" installs everything.
> > (2) "make light-install" does not install pgxs and server dev stuff.
> > this is the previous version of "make install".
> If we do that, we should remove install-all-headers. It's very confusing
Why not get rid of install-all-headers and light-install? Just have one
target that installs all that's needed, and call it "install". Are we
trying to save disk space or what?
People who are short on disk space because they are trying to run on a
small device has a lot of manual work to do anyway.
> > This target maybe of interest of packagers.
> This I don't understand.
I think the argument is that packagers may want to have different make
targets for the main package and the "development" package. AFAIK,
actually they don't.
What was the argument for having an "install-all-headers" target in the
first place? It creates a lot of unnecessary pain, just to save some
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"I think my standards have lowered enough that now I think 'good design'
is when the page doesn't irritate the living f*ck out of me." (JWZ)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])