On Wed, Mar 03, 1999 at 01:58:03PM -0500, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
> Actually, it doesn't matter! Maybe an inventory of .tgz files isn't even needed,
> since they are only used as the data source for the unpacking process. Once
> they've been unpacked, the only reason to keep them at all is fo
Lenz Grimmer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2 Mar 1999, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
>
> > > YaST's capability of unpacking .tgz-Archives is a leftover from ancient
> > > times, when Software Packages where gzipped tar Archives (like Slackware
> > > has). These Packages contained the whole directory struct
Hi,
On Wed, 3 Mar 1999, Ole Kofoed Hansen wrote:
> you know the page you referred to in the support database, is half
> German. I don't have any problems with this myself, but a lot of
> others might.
Whoops, you are right :)
I'll translate it ASAP. Thanks!
Bye,
LenZ
--
Hi Lenz,
Did you know that the page you referred to in the support database,
is half German. I don't have any problems with this myself, but a
lot of others might.
Regards
Ole Kofoed Hansen
>
> Well, then use RPM! You can install the source RPM of the previous version
> and modifiy the spec
Hi,
On 2 Mar 1999, Graham Murray wrote:
> > YaST's capability of unpacking .tgz-Archives is a leftover from ancient
> > times, when Software Packages where gzipped tar Archives (like Slackware
> > has). These Packages contained the whole directory structure and binaries
> > as well as pre- and
Lenz Grimmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> YaST's capability of unpacking .tgz-Archives is a leftover from ancient
> times, when Software Packages where gzipped tar Archives (like Slackware
> has). These Packages contained the whole directory structure and binaries
> as well as pre- and postinst
Hi,
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:
> Actually, I like /usr/local/packages for the .tgz files. But really
> (as I said in another message to this group), Yast ought to be capable
> of managing this kind of thing in a systematic way. Otherwise package
> management becomes incoheren
> On Mon, 01 Mar 1999 18:02:19 -0600 (CST), Mike Gorsuch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
|Mike> Most people prefer to use the directory /usr/local/src for all
|Mike> new stuff and /usr/local/bin for the installation of new
|Mike> binaries.
Actually, I like /usr/local/packages for the .tgz files
Paul Roundy wrote:
>
> Is there a standard location for untarring program source code? Is it
> ok to dump it in /usr/src/ along with the kernel source? I have been
> untarring and compiling from my home directory, but it struck me today
> that there may be a convention for this.
>
> Thanks,
Most people prefer to use the directory /usr/local/src for all new stuff and
/usr/local/bin for the installation of new binaries.
Mike
-
"The Darkest Hour is Just Before Dawn"
Mike Gorsuch
aka Wulfgang
ICQ UIN 6708
Is there a standard location for untarring program source code? Is it
ok to dump it in /usr/src/ along with the kernel source? I have been
untarring and compiling from my home directory, but it struck me today
that there may be a convention for this.
Thanks, Paul Roundy
-
To get out of thi
11 matches
Mail list logo
