Hi, On Tue, 13 Nov 2007, Johannes Sixt wrote: > On Tuesday 13 November 2007 22:10, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tuesday 13 November 2007 21:04, Johannes Sixt wrote: > > >> [PATCH 09/11] Allow a relative builtin template directory. > > >> [PATCH 10/11] Introduce git_etc_gitconfig() that encapsulates access > > >> of ETC_GITCONFIG. > > >> [PATCH 11/11] Allow ETC_GITCONFIG to be a relative path. > > >> > > >> These need probably some discussion. They avoid that $(prefix) is > > >> hardcoded and so allows that an arbitrary installation directory. > > > > > > ... and so allow that the compiled binaries are installed in any > > > directory that the user chooses. > > > > If you can do that without breaking the tests (specifically, the > > test script should pick up the version of git you just built, > > not from /usr/bin nor /usr/local/stow/git/bin) that would be > > great. > > Sorry, I don't understand your statement. Do you see any tests breaking? I guess what Junio is getting at: if your changes could lead to our not needing to hard code defaults, that would be awesome. For example, a very unhappy camper reported recently that installing git with a different prefix triggers a complete rebuild. Ciao, Dscho - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
