Re: gnustep-make experiment

[Helge Hess]

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 --
>
> GNUSTEP_MAKEFILES = $(word 1, \
>  $(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 GNUstep.sh 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).

Greets,
  Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://www.helgehess.eu/