hi Vicent,
Vincent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=E9ron?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Le jeu 15/08/2002 à 15:14, Alexandre Julliard a écrit :
>> Raul Dias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > configure is called with rpm location macros as:
>> >
>> > ./configure --prefix=%{_prefix} --libdir=%{_libdir} and so on
>> >
>> > that is expanded to:
>> >
>> > ./configure --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib ....
>> >
>> > In turn this variables won't rely on ${prefix} in Makefile.
>>
>> But %{_libdir} should expand to ${prefix}/lib, not /usr/lib. Otherwise
>> you can't change prefix and have it do anything useful. Is this
>> something you can fix, or are the _libdir etc. macros hardcoded?
>>
>
>They're not hardcoded (at least on my system, RH7.3 with
>rpm-4.0.4-7x.18). In fact, they are defined in
>/usr/lib/rpm/(arch)-linux/macros, and except for _sysconfdir,
>_localstatedir et _oldincludedir, they all rely on other macros to
>update themselves should you choose another _prefix.
>
right.
>Raul, another way you could install while doing the RPM is via the
>%makeinstall macro rather than a manual "make install". Same thing
>applies to %configure vs "./configure". All the dirs are already given,
>and as a bonus, your spec file will be smaller and more easily
>manageable.
Would be it, but %makeinstall does not handle dlldir.
>
>FYI, the format of the directory passing of the %makeinstall macro is
>make prefix=%(?buildroot:%{buildroot}}%{_prefix} ... install,
>which is close to what you had originally.
>
>I believe using those %configure and %makeinstall macros are the proper
>way to use rpm nowadays.
>
true.
But changing them for every app is not the Right Thing.
What I want to show is that other applications solve this
very problem by using DESTDIR.
%configure and %makeinstall is fresh in rpm world (about 2 years).
[]'s
Raul Dias
>Vincent
>
