David Masover wrote:
I don't see anything that makes a packaged reiser4progs better than an
unpackaged one, except for the two things you're defeating with any
custom version: dependencies and automatic updates.
One big benefit is that installed files are never lost. It's often
difficult to
michael chang wrote:
On 11/21/05, Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vitaly Fertman wrote:
On Monday 21 November 2005 10:09, Hans Reiser wrote:
Philippe GramoullИ wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:33:44 -0600, David Masover [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
michael chang wrote:
or to actually put package building scripts for package-handling
distros in the source package (or use something like checkinstall,
provided it doesn't conflict too bad). [You can also did what
On Monday 21 November 2005 10:09, Hans Reiser wrote:
Philippe GramoullИ wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on something and haven't specified a prefix on
| configure, I expect /usr/local to be used. If I
Vitaly Fertman wrote:
On Monday 21 November 2005 10:09, Hans Reiser wrote:
Philippe GramoullИ wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on something and haven't specified a prefix on
| configure, I expect /usr/local
On 11/21/05, Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vitaly Fertman wrote:
On Monday 21 November 2005 10:09, Hans Reiser wrote:
Philippe GramoullИ wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on something and
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on something and haven't specified a prefix on
| configure, I expect /usr/local to be used. If I wanted /, I'd have
| specified that on configure time. If it installed in / by default, it
Philippe Gramoullé wrote:
Hello,
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 05:07:23 +0100
rvalles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| When I run make install on something and haven't specified a prefix on
| configure, I expect /usr/local to be used. If I wanted /, I'd have
| specified that on configure time. If it
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:09:01 -0800, Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Ok, I propose the following: search the standard locations for where
it is currently, tell the user, ask the user if they want to rename
those versions to *.old if the install of the new one succeeds, and
then prompt for
On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 05:06:43PM +0100, Philippe Gramoullé wrote:
So should a crash occur and /usr becomes corrupted, well, at least / is
mounted and i could
reiserfsck partitions right away, handy when the server is several thousand
kilometers away :)
I expect to do the same for
Hello Hans,
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:17:37 -0800
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| What do the sysadmins on the list think?
|
| Hans
Personally, for Reiserfs V3, i always compiled reiserfsprogs statically and
installed
the tools in /sbin.
Mainly because, we used to have /usr on a
Clifford Beshers wrote:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SBINSYSTEMBINARIES
Hans Reiser wrote:
currently it installs mkfs.reiser4 and such in /usr/local/sbin
This is not found by default paths for most roots, and seems unlikely to
be where I would want it to go if I was
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Clifford Beshers wrote:
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SBINSYSTEMBINARIES
well, this says /sbin as I read it. Thanks for the URL Clifford!
The FHS doesn't specify what the default installation prefix for a
source tarball should be. That
On Sat, Nov 12, 2005 at 11:17:37PM -0800, Hans Reiser wrote:
What do the sysadmins on the list think?
Doesn't matter to me, fwiw. If i were to build it manually, i'd run
./configure --prefix=/usr/local. A distribution would use --prefix=/ in its
build scripts. /usr/local might be a safer
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 23:17:37 -0800, Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
currently it installs mkfs.reiser4 and such in /usr/local/sbin This is
not found by default paths for most roots, and seems unlikely to be
where I would want it to go if I was sysadmin I would never
install
Hans Reiser wrote:
currently it installs mkfs.reiser4 and such in /usr/local/sbin
This is not found by default paths for most roots, and seems unlikely to
be where I would want it to go if I was sysadmin I would never
install mkfs.anything unless I wanted it in /sbin. but then I am
re!
I guess that according to LSB it's the only way - to install it into
/usr/local/sbin - because it's additional installed software and does not
come with default distribution.
If reiser4progs is package included in distribution then it should be
installed /sbin or /usr/sbin.
that's my
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#SBINSYSTEMBINARIES
Hans Reiser wrote:
currently it installs mkfs.reiser4 and such in /usr/local/sbin
This is not found by default paths for most roots, and seems unlikely to
be where I would want it to go if I was sysadmin I would never
18 matches
Mail list logo
