[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FHS
From: |
Richard B. Kreckel |
Subject: |
Re: FHS |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Jan 2002 18:47:49 +0100 (CET) |
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > When upgrading some packages to AutoConf-2.52 I noticed that given
> > --prefix=/usr, manpages go straight into /usr/man/. Hmm, but we got a
> > filesystem hierarchy standard <http://www.pathname.com/fhs/>!
>
> But we've also got the GNU Coding Standards
> <http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_toc.html>.
Okay, but I am unable to spot the contradiction with FHS. For instance,
it says:
`mandir'
The top-level directory for installing the man pages (if any) for
this package. It will normally be `/usr/local/man', but you should
write it as `$(prefix)/man'. (If you are using Autoconf, write it as
address@hidden@'.)
There, $(prefix)/man would be problematic, but if the Autoconf-generated
configure would replace Makefile.in's @mandir@ with something appropiate
everybody would be merry. Wrong?
Cheers
-richy.
--
Richard B. Kreckel
<address@hidden>
<http://wwwthep.physik.uni-mainz.de/~kreckel/>
- FHS, Richard B. Kreckel, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Peter Eisentraut, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS,
Richard B. Kreckel <=
- Re: FHS, Lars Hecking, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Harlan Stenn, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Harlan Stenn, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/01/05
- Re: FHS, Guido Draheim, 2002/01/06
- Re: FHS, Russ Allbery, 2002/01/06
- Re: FHS, Guido Draheim, 2002/01/06
- Re: FHS, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/01/06
- Re: FHS, Harlan Stenn, 2002/01/06