[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gnustep-make experiment

From: Helge Hess
Subject: Re: gnustep-make experiment
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 15:22:08 +0100

On Feb 8, 2007, at 14:13, Nicola Pero wrote:
Here is an example -- put this at the top of your GNUmakefile, just before include $(GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES)/common.make --

 $(wildcard /usr/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles) \
 $(wildcard /var/lib/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles) \
 $(wildcard /usr/local/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles) \
 $(wildcard /opt/GNUstep/System/Library/Makefiles) \
 $(wildcard /System/Library/Makefiles))

the result is that:

* if you source or have your GNUstep environment properly setup, it gets used

I suppose this hack would work for me, but I don't think that this is what admins expect from a GNU software package. Regular thing to do is ./configure --prefix, then make.

Though of course the real fragment could also check for 'config.make', giving us both things, the automatic attempt and the configurability ;-)

Well, I'm talking about FHS, why would they need to know?
They would need to know because you can have different FHSes.

Last time I checked there is only one file hierarchy standard! ;-)

Well, really, this is something which belongs into the resource- lookup class (NSBundle and friends), not into an environment configuration (why would you ever want to switch that for a compiled binary!).
I think Unixes only really differ in the PREFIX?

Then we have Windows, completely different approach.

MacOS is more like GNUstep and should not be treated as FHS (in contrary, on MacOS you probably also want to have some stuff in FHS, and some in MacOS layout).

Helge Hess

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]