Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: 3.0 DESTDIR
- X-seq: zsh-workers 8383
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Clint Adams <schizo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: 3.0 DESTDIR
- Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 01:55:57 +0000
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <19991023204554.A31639@xxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <991019052248.ZM4198@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <991019061342.ZM4317@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <19991023204554.A31639@xxxxxxxx>
On Oct 23, 8:45pm, Clint Adams wrote:
} Subject: 3.0 DESTDIR
}
} Bart, please backport the DESTDIR stuff for inclusion in 3.0.8.
I'll consider it, but in retrospect I'm doubtful that it should have been
included in 3.1 in the first place. (Yes, I know I argued in favor at
the time.)
However, I now can't see how
make DESTDIR=/foo/bar/baz install
differs in end result from
make
make prefix=/foo/bar/baz/usr/local install
provided that the same options were passed to "configure" in each case.
It just seems we've scattered references to $DESTDIR in a whole lot of
files (introducing several bugs that had to be fixed later along the way)
without actually achieving anything new.
If you can show me something substantially different that DESTDIR is the
best way to handle, I might swing back the other way again.
--
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author