Hi Igor,
Your response doesn't make sense. The install command is specified in
[progname].spec which is used to build the rpm. Why would Redhat change
the installation script? Unless they knew that the installation script
was attempting to install the file somewhere it shouldn't be. Since
Redhat has claimed to be compliant with the linux standard since 7.3,
maybe the problem is that the installation scripts were written on
non-compliant distros including earlier Redhat versions.
Jim Wantz WB0TFK
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002
igueths at attbi.com wrote:
> Well I have heard of instances where if you compile a prog from source under
> RH, and you attempt to update the system with something like up2date, rpm will
> complain that it can't find certain dependencies such as Libstdc++. This is
> because rpm drops it in a nonstandard location, which is different from where
> it would be placed after a make install for example. This is basically what I
> meant by overprotection. However, dpkg tends to put things in places such
> as /usr/sbin, which is a standard location for the most part. I know ssh
> installs itself there. One remedy for this I think is for people to just edit
> the install command in the toplevel Makefile, however I know some people might
> be leary about doing this.
> > On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Igor Gueths wrote:
> >
> > > Fortunately, Debian is not so
> > > protective of its pkg's like RH!
> > Care to explain the above statement?
> > --
> > Bill in Denver
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Speakup mailing list
> > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
> _______________________________________________
> Speakup mailing list
> Speakup at braille.uwo.ca
> http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
>
