Nicholas Wourms wrote: > I think making the default "docdir" $(datadir)/doc/$(PACKAGE) is > a bad idea. The primary reason is that clobbering can occur if > the user installs multiple versions of the same package (which > isn't unusal in cases where compatibility issues arise between > versions). For the user that installs multiple versions of the same package there will be many more issues than just the docdir. The other dirs such as bindir and libdir and the others all have the same issue. If you install multiple versions of the same binary then they will by default all have the same bindir and will all fall on top of each other. > This problem was delt with long ago in the various > packaging utilities; they chose to use > $(datadir)/doc/$(PACKAGE)-$(VERSION) instead. Now, pretty much > every distribution does it this way. That is a very parochial view. There are many distributions that do not append the package version to the doc directory. (You should get out more. :-) > Shouldn't the gnu standards/autoconf/automake reflect the general > consensus? A Makefile is a developer tool. Package management is a system administration tool. Both are useful in their own contexts. When you build packages you should apply your own local system policy and create a package that is compliant to your local conventions. There is nothing that prevents the packager from applying local policy and appending a version string onto all files when creating a package. In fact I would guess that most packages modify the default locations to some extent. This is really more in the realm of the FHS than the realm ofautoconf. Bob _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
