On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 22:48 -0500, Trevor Woerner wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Gaetan Nadon <[email protected]> wrote: > > --- > > build.sh | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/build.sh b/build.sh > > index 4979fc0..80452d3 100755 > > --- a/build.sh > > +++ b/build.sh > > @@ -356,12 +358,15 @@ process() { > > > > LIB_FLAGS= > > if [ X"$LIBDIR" != X ]; then > > - LIB_FLAGS="--libdir=${PREFIX}/${LIBDIR}" > > + LIB_FLAGS="--libdir=${EPREFIX}/${LIBDIR}" > > fi > > > > # Use "sh autogen.sh" since some scripts are not executable in CVS > > if [ $needs_config -eq 1 ] || [ X"$NOAUTOGEN" = X ]; then > > - sh ${DIR_CONFIG}/${CONFCMD} --prefix=${PREFIX} ${LIB_FLAGS} \ > > + sh ${DIR_CONFIG}/${CONFCMD} \ > > + --prefix=${PREFIX} \ > > + ${EPREFIX_SET:+--exec-prefix="$EPREFIX"} \ > > + ${LIB_FLAGS} \ > > ${QUIET:+--quiet} \ > > ${CONFFLAGS} \ > > ${CC:+CC="$CC"} \ > > Instead of doing all the "EPREFIX_SET" stuff, couldn't we just do: > > + ${EPREFIX:+--exec-prefix="$EPREFIX"} \ > > and leave off the rest of this patch? We don't really need another > variable whose defined or undefined state lets us know whether EPREFIX > is defined or not :-)
That's what I first thought, then I realized the difference between $PREFIX and the other ones. $PREFIX is a mandatory variable while the others are not. We need the value from EPREFIX to compute the default values for other variables, but we don't want to emit a command line with --exec-prefix on each module. I did not want to invoke each module with a long list of --what-have-you when they are all default values. In fact, I was thinking that perhaps we should not make PREFIX mandatory. The configure script has a default value usr/local when none supplied. That a separate question of course. Currently, all modules are invoked with --libdir even when the default value is used, and that's bugging me. The user should be able to switch back and forth between build.sh and configure for a particular module and not see a different config.log which would trigger an investigation. How does he know it is equivalent and not a script bug. Thanks Gaetan
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
