On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 02:35:04PM +0100, Andreas Kusalananda Kähäri wrote: > Hi, > [cut] > > The scripts make use of a common set of shell functions, defined in > their own file. This is currently sourced like this: > > prefix="@prefix@" > exec_prefix="@exec_prefix@" > . "@libexecdir@/toolbox.shlib" > > Then, in the configure.ac file, I have a line like > > AC_CONFIG_FILES([src/script], [chmod +x src/script]) > > for each script, so that it's generated from the corresponding script.in > file upon running configure. > > My query is this: Would libexecdir be the best place to put a file that > is architecture dependent, but *not* meant to be executed separatedly > (it's a library). Or should it actually be stored under libdir (which > I've never seen done with a shell library of functions)? Just to clarify: The scripts themselves are naturally installed in bindir, the question is what to do with a "shared library of shell functions". Thanks for the replies so far. I will try with libdir/package-name and see what it looks like. If anyone knows of a precedent for doing it one way or another, I'd be happy to get to know about it. Regards, Andreas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
