"David Starks-Browning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greetings,
>
> I'm building xerces-c-src1_7_0.tar.gz on a number of platforms,
> starting with alphaev67-dec-osf5.1 (using gcc/g++ 3.0.4).
>
> I notice that "make install" installs libxerces-c1_7_0.so in
> $PREFIX/lib. I would prefer to have this go to $EPREFIX/lib where
>
> EPREFIX=@exec_prefix@
>
> is in obj/Makefile.in.
>
> I realise that runConfigure passes no --exec-prefix option to
> configure, but this is typically defined in
> ${prefix}/share/config.site anyway, which configure reads and obeys
> just fine, even when called from runConfigure.
>
> I can supply the patch to obj/Makefile.in if there is interest.
I would really like to see the make process embrace the full benefit
of automake and autoconf. Right now it sort of dabbles with it. I
don't know enough about overhauling the system, and I don't have an
enormous amount of time for such a project, but I am willing to
coordinate with someone who does have more experience with the GNU
make chain and make sure it gets added to CVS.
> *BUT*, is "make install" a red herring? Should $XERCESCROOT (i.e.,
> the build dir) be the only way to access this package?
make install should work just like any other tool that uses
automake/autoconf.
jas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
