path vs symlinks

Tushar Teredesai tushar at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Mar 29 16:47:13 PST 2003


Joe wrote:

>so people are putting stuff in some unorthadox places. I would stick true to
>the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard but not having any package management it
>is easier for me to put all my added programs in there own directories so
>that i can easily remove them (the base system gets put in the normal
>directories) . It doesnt take much work either. Long configure line?? all
>you have to add is
>--prefix=/usr/local/package??
>  
>
The configure lines become long for the packages as the level of 
dependency increases. So for a package foo2 that depends on foo1, the 
configure line for foo2 would be something like ./configure 
--prefix=/usr/local/foo2 --with-foo1=/usr/local/foo1. And for a package 
foo3 that depends on foo1 and foo2, you have ./configure 
--prefix=/usr/local/foo3 --with-foo1=/usr/local/foo1 
--with-foo2=/usr/local/foo2. And so on...

And not to mention the long PATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, PKG_CONFIG_PATH...

-- 
Tushar Teredesai
   http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
   http://www.geocities.com/tushar/


-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message



More information about the blfs-support mailing list