[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why relink the library during make install?
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Why relink the library during make install? |
Date: |
25 Jul 2002 14:31:20 +0900 |
Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:
> configure --prefix=/A
> make
> make install prefix=/B
>
> cannot expect that auxiliary files (in lib, share, doc, etc) will
> be found. The "make" process has no chance to put the pathnames
> /B/lib, /B/share etc. into the executables and libraries because it
> doesn't know about /B at that moment. In most cases, the installed
> package will not run.
Well, duh, that's how it's supposed to work! People who do that know
what to expect (at least, I suppose, with every GNU package except yours).
> > Guess why in the world people using prefix=... in the 'make install'
> > at all?
>
> a. Because they don't know about DESTDIR.
Or they don't use it because it's (1) not as powerful, and (2) not
supported as universally, as `make install prefix='. The second point
is important to people who install lots of packages; they don't want to
worry about which package supports which installation methods, so they
use whatever is the most widely supported -- and that's the `prefix'
method, presumably because it's required by the GNU standards.
> On some operating systems, it cannot build the stuff completely until
> the shared libraries have been installed. This is why "make install"
> must relink.
On which systems?
If it's really impossible to make it work on certain systems, then I
suppose it's alright to say `make install prefix=... isn't supported
correctly on systems X, Y, and Z' -- but that's no reason to not
support it correctly on others. [And if the systems on which it doesn't
work are those over which we have some influence, then we should try to
fix them.]
DESTDIR isn't a sufficient solution for everybody, no matter how much
you like it (no, kludges involving temporary directories in /tmp and tar
are not good enough).
-Miles
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, (continued)
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Bruno Haible, 2002/07/24
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Paul Lew, 2002/07/24
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2002/07/24
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Russ Allbery, 2002/07/24
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Ralph Corderoy, 2002/07/31
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Miles Bader, 2002/07/31
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/07/24
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Albert Chin, 2002/07/25
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Albert Chin, 2002/07/25
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Miles Bader, 2002/07/25
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Albert Chin, 2002/07/26
- Re: Why relink the library during make install?, Russ Allbery, 2002/07/26