Re: Does mandir get saved some place?

[Jim <linux.tech.guy@xxxxxxxxx>]

Nikolay,

On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Nikolay Aleksandrovich Pavlov (ZyX) <
kp-pav@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Wondering why do you install different zsh versions with one prefix? This
> would need some hacks like moving mandir you mentioned.


Simple answer, by default this is what happens when you build zsh. Zsh
has this "self protection system" built into the the build and install, so
it
doesn't overwrite unless your building the "same version". So, for
someone new to the zsh build process, they can just checkout and build
another version and each version will work. All by default and all with the
/usr/local/ prefix. May not be the best way, and it is not the only way,
but it
appears to be the default way. You don't need man pages to "run" any
version of zsh. They are nice to have when needed.

After 30+ years of system administration(UNIX/Linux) on multi user
systems, I view things from the point of view of how this would best work
for all users on that system.  Old habits are sometimes hard to break.


> For testing purposes I usually just compile with prefix
> `~/.local-${app}[-${app_version}]`, this way each application is
> installed into its own directory and additionally does not need superuser
> rights for installation or creating a package. For system-wide
> installations there is /opt which may be used for this purpose.
>

Like most things with UNIX/Linux there are any number of ways of doing this.
Some may be better or worst then others for one reason or another, but will
still work. Ask 12 people how they do it, and you are likely to get 12
answers
and or at least 12 variants of the same answer.


>
> Of course, if you need all zsh’s available at once you will need to remove
> `zsh` executable, keeping only `zsh-{version}` and modify $PATH, either in
> .zshrc or in some place like /etc/env.d.
>
>
Not sure I understand what you are saying here, or at least why you need
to remove the `zsh` executable. I have to assume you are not talking about
removing /bin/zsh. I guess I'm looking at it from a slightly different
point of
view. Having only one `zsh` is not a bad idea.


> This variant is also more universal: not all software uses its version in
> its paths.
>

One of many reasons I love zsh.


>
> Alternative is making “a unique path for each version” be computable based
> on `$ZSH_VERSION`, in any case even if new variable is created it will be
> only available in new zsh versions.
>

True. Sadly, but true.  But I think there is a different way to approach
this.
Just need to think about this for a while.

Useful discussion, thanks.

Jim