On 04/06/2012 02:58 PM, Nate Bargmann wrote: > I think you're going above and beyond the call of duty. ;-) > > However, IMO, it's impossible to account for all the various packaging > schemes at the source distribution level. In the project I work with, > the source tarball installs to "standard" directories under /usr/local. > After that it is up to the package maintainer of a given distribution to > customize the installation for their binary package management. > Otherwise I think one will go insane or at least set themselves up for a > lot of extra, thankless work trying to chase even the most popular > packaging formats. > > YMMV, > > - Nate >> > Thanks. Actually, early today I decided the most sensible thing to do would be to just /not/ have the desktop/icon files installed by the source, but rather to just package them with the source and leave the installation to the distros. I found out upon further research that putting static files in a static location is not a hard thing for package managers to do. Gentoo has functions specifically for installing menu files and icons, and for a Debian package its a simple do_install call. Furthermore, if I tried to wrap it in make install, this would cause additional problems, because then people would have to have root privileges in order to install, since the proper /usr/share locations are usually root owned. -- frigidcode.com indicium.us
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
