Michael Jennings wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > I use /opt/local for truly local packages. In which case I *do*
> > want to redefine _prefix.
> > ...
> > 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.
>
> While I won't spend much time observing that /opt/local is completely
> non-standard and against the proper and intended use of /opt,
You are probably thinking a GNU/Linux system that follows the FHS.
But I am building rpms for HP-UX and /opt/local is the best fit for
the HP-UX filesystem layout which does not follow the FHS. I am
installing much GNU software in /opt/local with rpm. The FHS is not
even involved there.
> I would like to note that I said no *package* should redefine
> %{_prefix}. I never said the user shouldn't. Packages should rely
> on the values of the standard macros, like %{_prefix}, so that users
> may alter these values to their hearts' content without the package
> interfering.
I think we are talking past each other. You are thinking very
parochially. If I were building a package which I wanted to build in
a standard way and which I might want to give to others to install on
random GNU/Linux FHS systems then I would want to follow the FHS. But
I'm not, I don't, so I didn't.
> If you set %{_prefix} to /opt/local in your rpmmacros file or
> whatever, more power to you.
That would force all of the locally built packages to use /opt/local.
But I don't want all of them installed there. I want just the ones
that I have specified and built to install there so your suggestion
would not work for me. For example the GNU coreutils I do not want to
install in /usr/bin overwriting the native HP-UX versions. (Well, I
might want to do that but it would cause problems later. :-) Most of
the GNU software ported to HP-UX falls into that catagory.
> But imagine your frustration with a package that forceably set it
> back to /usr or /usr/local.
Why would I create a package that did that? And if I did I would only
have myself to blame for it. I would probably remember that I had
shot myself in the foot, curse myself for it, then fix the spec file
and rebuild.
I think one point that is being missed is that these are *local*
packages which are created for *local* benefit. I am not giving them
to others. I am not building packages created by others. (Most
packages are not portable enough to work on other operating systems.)
So this hypothetical situation you are trying to suggest just does not
occur.
Bob
_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
