Hi,
sorry for the top post....
Personally, %makeinstall should be left to the developers discretion. As
you had already previously stated:
"Why the %makeinstall? makeinstall is an anachronism and should only be
used if make DESTDIR=... install is nonfunctional."
So, that would imply, that there could be a case for it. I don't know if
rasqal falls into this, but if it works with make DEST... install then
it should that.
Re: broken .la files... who cares? its a pointless concern since Fedora
policy is not to ship .la files.
Hey.. look at that... I didn't disagree with you Ralf :)
Michael
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
------- Additional Comments From thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-18 16:14 EST -------
It's not that I do not want to use %makeinstall - it's that the packaging
guidelines that mention you shouldn't use it do not say *anything* useful about
it, why it's bad, and they're not even correct. If I need to make this change,
I need to know because I have a bunch of other packages using %makeinstall.
Let's take those rules step by step:
%makeinstall overrides a set of environment variables during "make
install". I.e. it performs make prefix="..." includedir="..." ...
This is wrong - it overrides make variables, not environment variables.
Unless make isn't broken and unless the makefiles aren't playing dirty
games with make flags the effect is the same.
In addition, this is all the rule says - it does not say that it is wrong or why
it is wrong. So it's a) factually wrong and b) irrelevant.
It is error prone, and can have unexpected effects when run against less
than perfect Makefiles.
How is it error prone ?
- More sources of errors: A dozen vars vs. one single var.
- %makeinstall causes the makefiles to see a different set of variables
between "make install" and other (previous/subsequent) invocations of
make.
How does make DESTDIR=... not fail when run against a
less than perfect Makefile - for example, one that doesn't even *have* DESTDIR ?
It can trigger unnecessary rebuilds when executing "make install"
Don't know about this one, it may be true or may not be true, but in all the
packages I've built I've never known this to be a problem that actually bothered me.
It's the second point above.
%makeinstall causes the makefiles to see different variables during
"make install", than those which had been used in %configure or during
"make all".
This triggers broken rebuilds, if a makefile contains dependencies on
the make variables being changed during %makeinstall.
A similar problem occurs with makefile which edit/generate files during
"make install" ("install-hooks"), e.g. to propagate final installation
dirs to scripts/config-files.
If a package contains libtool archives, it can cause broken *.la files to
be installed.
I haven't seen broken .la files,
This issue for example affects(~ed?) GCC.
Ralf
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
