Three minutes ago, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> "--prefix /usr/local/racket-5.1" (for example) has been working
> great for my clients and me for years, and I hope that it continues
> to work in exactly the same way.
It will.
> Note that originally I started building from source because the
> distribution ".deb" or ".rpm" build didn't include the CGC binaries
> on which one of my clients depends. Now that we've been building
> from source, the "--prefix" has been handy for letting us have
> multiple versions installed, and for having them follow a consistent
> naming convention (with less chance for user error in having the
> correct version number in the pathname, since we're never manually
> moving the tree around nor manually renaming it).
Since you're using a racket-specific path as a prefix, you're getting
a very similar end result -- but IMO less convenient in the prefix
case.
I'll try to clarify the visible differences.
The build part is nearly identical. Here are the build steps that
you'd use in *both* cases, with sample directory names -- steps that
are different are marked with "PRFX" for a --prefix build and "INPL"
for an in-place one:
cd /tmp
tar xzf racket-5.1-src-unix.tgz
cd racket-5.1/src
mkdir build
cd build
PRFX ../configure --prefix /usr/local/racket-5.1
INPL ../configure
make
make install
cd /tmp
PRFX rm -rf racket-5.1
INPL rm -rf racket-5.1/src # <-- optional
INPL mv racket-5.1 /usr/local
The differences at this point are:
* In the prefix case, you cannot move the resulting directory. In the
in-place case it can move -- and it can be accessed by different
paths. (For example, you mount /usr/local as /mnt/server/local on a
second machine, and then run /mnt/server/local/racket-5.1/racket)
* In the prefix case, things are spread in an FHS-like way:
- executables: /usr/local/racket-5.1/bin/*
- collections: /usr/local/racket-5.1/lib/racket/collects/*
- documentation: /usr/local/racket-5.1/share/racket/doc/*
- libraries: /usr/local/racket-5.1/lib/*
and /usr/local/racket-5.1/lib/racket/*
- includes: /usr/local/racket-5.1/include/racket
- man pages: /usr/local/racket-5.1/share/man/man1/*
and in the in-place case you get a simpler tree in your resulting
directory:
- executables: /usr/local/racket-5.1/bin/*
- collections: /usr/local/racket-5.1/collects/*
- documentation: /usr/local/racket-5.1/doc/*
- libraries: /usr/local/racket-5.1/lib/*
- includes: /usr/local/racket-5.1/include/*
- man pages: /usr/local/racket-5.1/man/*
* In the racket case, the directory layout corresponds to the source,
so you can keep the .git directory, easily create patches, etc.
IMO, these are all advantages for the in-place side. They're minor,
but since building involves the same efforst, I prefer the better
option.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
