On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 14:33 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>         > thanks, James
>         > 
>         > should I use '--exec-prefix' or '--prefix' ?
>         > 
>         > is it just like below:
>         > 
>         > ./configure --prefix= usr/bin
>         > 
>         > ----------
>         > Installation directories:
>         >   --prefix=PREFIX         install architecture-independent
>         files in PREFIX
>         >                           [/usr/local]
>         >   --exec-prefix=EPREFIX   install architecture-dependent
>         files in EPREFIX
>         >                           [PREFIX]
>         
>         As noted, --exec-prefix will default to the same thing as
>         --prefix.  So 
>         you only need to use --prefix.  If you only set --exec-prefix,
>         then 
>         --prefix will remain at the default (/usr/local) which in this
>         case 
>         probably means the magic files will end up there.  That's a
>         bit 
>         confusing.  I think --exec-prefix is designed for complex
>         scenarios 
>         where you have multiple architectures supported in the same
>         install 
>         tree, something that likely doesn't apply to you.
>         
>         If it were up to me, I would use the default --prefix
>         (/usr/local ) and 
>         install everything there.  This way, the files in /usr/bin
>         will remain 
>         "owned" by the package management system, and be updated when
>         a fix 
>         comes out for the security issue you are trying to patch.
>         Generally, 
>         /usr/local should be positioned before /usr/bin in your PATH
>         (if not, 
>         you should fix this).

checkinstall makes a .deb that is owned and managed by the package
management system !

James

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html

Reply via email to