Michael Jennings wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > If not then probably defining _prefix is better.
> > %define _prefix /usr/local
> > In which case change prefix to _prefix throughout the file.
> > s/%{prefix}/%{_prefix}/g
>
> No, don't do this. Packages which (misguidedly) go in /usr/local
> should not redefine %{_prefix}. In fact, no package should redefine
> %{_prefix}.
I think we are both agreed that packaging an rpm with files in
/usr/local is undesirable. I chose not to push that point because
people keep trying to do it. But I never create packages that include
/usr/local. That should be reserved for local hacks. Which I read as
meaing 'make install' directly.
I use /opt/local for truly local packages. In which case I *do* want
to redefine _prefix. If I were to package something in /usr/local
(agreed, a bad idea) then I would certainly force it with that
redefinition. If I want to force /opt/local for my prefix then I also
need to make that work. Remember, if I want to avoid using /usr then
I don't want to use the rpm macros file definition and must supply my
own. Otherwise I can't use the %configure and %makeinstall macros and
that would be worse.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
