[gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Aaron Blew]

I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
/opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic links
or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I think it
would solve quite a few problems.

-Aaron

[gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Aaron Blew]

I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
/opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic links
or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I think it
would solve quite a few problems.

-Aaron

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Thilo Bangert]

hi aaron,

Am Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2001 09:02 schrieben Sie:
> I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
> gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
> such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
> programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
> insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
> /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
> links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
> think it would solve quite a few problems.
>

if i remember correctly does the Linux Standard Base define to put 
gnome, kde etc in /opt - so your "things" configure scripts/Makefiles 
should be adjusted to look there too/first.

> -Aaron

greetings
Thilo

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Mikael Hallendal]

Aaron Blew <ablew@internetcds.com> writes:

> I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
> gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
> such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
> programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
> insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
> /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
> links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
> think it would solve quite a few problems.

Hi!

I think it is wonderful to have a distribution that finally *does* put
things this way. I think it is better to fix those programs that
doesn't compile when GNOME (or KDE, mozilla) is located in other
locations than /usr since they are broken. They should be using
'gnome-config' in there Makefile (if they don't use auto*).

gnome-config --cflags libgnomeui for includes
gnome-config --libs libgnomeui for libs

If the configure-script is broken you can try to execute it with:

CFLAGS="-I/opt/gnome/include" LDFLAGS="-L/opt/gnome/lib" ./configure 

Regards,
Mikael Hallendal

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Aaron Blew]

Oops.  Well then, if that's the standard, all for it!  Maybe I shouldn't
write stuff like this so late at night ;).

Thanks for setting me straight,
-Aaron


On 13 Jun 2001 02:25:32 +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote:
> hi aaron,
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2001 09:02 schrieben Sie:
> > I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
> > gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
> > such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
> > programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
> > insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
> > /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
> > links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
> > think it would solve quite a few problems.
> >
> 
> if i remember correctly does the Linux Standard Base define to put 
> gnome, kde etc in /opt - so your "things" configure scripts/Makefiles 
> should be adjusted to look there too/first.
> 
> > -Aaron
> 
> greetings
> Thilo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
> http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Aaron Blew]

Oops.  Well then, if that's the standard, all for it!  Maybe I shouldn't
write stuff like this so late at night ;).

Thanks for setting me straight,
-Aaron


On 13 Jun 2001 02:25:32 +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote:
> hi aaron,
> 
> Am Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2001 09:02 schrieben Sie:
> > I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
> > gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
> > such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
> > programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
> > insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
> > /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
> > links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
> > think it would solve quite a few problems.
> >
> 
> if i remember correctly does the Linux Standard Base define to put 
> gnome, kde etc in /opt - so your "things" configure scripts/Makefiles 
> should be adjusted to look there too/first.
> 
> > -Aaron
> 
> greetings
> Thilo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
> http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Holger Brueckner]

hi,

just my personal opinion ... is there any reason to use opt at all ? ok, you
reply it's standard .. but what do we really need it for ? now we have /usr
/usr/local and /opt .. three different places for binaries to go too. i
really don't like that :)

here's my personal fix:

mv /opt /usr/opt
ln -s /usr/opt /opt

:)
Holger ... voted most angry looking #gentoo member ... *hehe*

> Oops.  Well then, if that's the standard, all for it!  Maybe I shouldn't
> write stuff like this so late at night ;).
>
> Thanks for setting me straight,
> -Aaron
>
>
> On 13 Jun 2001 02:25:32 +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote:
> > hi aaron,
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2001 09:02 schrieben Sie:
> > > I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
> > > gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
> > > such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
> > > programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
> > > insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
> > > /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
> > > links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
> > > think it would solve quite a few problems.
> > >
> >
> > if i remember correctly does the Linux Standard Base define to put
> > gnome, kde etc in /opt - so your "things" configure scripts/Makefiles
> > should be adjusted to look there too/first.
> >
> > > -Aaron
> >
> > greetings
> > Thilo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
> > http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
> http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Ben Lutgens]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2262 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2001 at 05:55:30PM +0200, Holger Brueckner wrote:
>hi,
>
>here's my personal fix:
>
>mv /opt /usr/opt
>ln -s /usr/opt /opt

and how is this a) less places for binaries to be. and b) better. and c)
fhs2.1 compliant.

/usr/opt/gnome/bin is much more to type than /opt/gnome/bin. It's still
not dropping the binaries in /usr/bin.

I do not think that symlinks make you fhs2.1 compliant.

>
>:)
>Holger ... voted most angry looking #gentoo member ... *hehe*
>
>> Oops.  Well then, if that's the standard, all for it!  Maybe I shouldn't
>> write stuff like this so late at night ;).
>>
>> Thanks for setting me straight,
>> -Aaron
>>
>>
>> On 13 Jun 2001 02:25:32 +0200, Thilo Bangert wrote:
>> > hi aaron,
>> >
>> > Am Mittwoch, 13. Juni 2001 09:02 schrieben Sie:
>> > > I have question/suggestion.  Is it really necessary to put mozilla,
>> > > gnome and others in /opt?  I know it keeps it a bit more organzed and
>> > > such, but it really makes it a pain when compiling things. Some
>> > > programs, despite what they're told to use via the configure script
>> > > insist on using includes from /usr/include instead of
>> > > /opt/gnome/include.  If not changing it, at least provide sympolic
>> > > links or something (ie ln -s /usr/gnome/include/* /usr/include/ ).  I
>> > > think it would solve quite a few problems.
>> > >
>> >
>> > if i remember correctly does the Linux Standard Base define to put
>> > gnome, kde etc in /opt - so your "things" configure scripts/Makefiles
>> > should be adjusted to look there too/first.
>> >
>> > > -Aaron
>> >
>> > greetings
>> > Thilo
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > gentoo-dev mailing list
>> > gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
>> > http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gentoo-dev mailing list
>> gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
>> http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>gentoo-dev mailing list
>gentoo-dev@cvs.gentoo.org
>http://cvs.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

-- 
Ben Lutgens		
Sistina Software Inc.	
Kernel panic: I have no root and I want to scream

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] make install suggestion/question

[Achim Gottinger]

Holger Brueckner wrote:
> 
> hi,
> 
> just my personal opinion ... is there any reason to use opt at all ? ok, you
> reply it's standard .. but what do we really need it for ? now we have /usr
> /usr/local and /opt .. three different places for binaries to go too. i
> really don't like that :)
> 
> here's my personal fix:
> 
> mv /opt /usr/opt
> ln -s /usr/opt /opt
> 
> :)
> Holger ... voted most angry looking #gentoo member ... *hehe*
> 
Hi holger,

we plan to implement a more flexible method for install locations. In
future it will be
possible to decide if you wanna install to /opt/[package] or to /usr or
tp /usr/X11R6 or
to [wherever]. Till then we do not plan to break fhs by moving opt to
/usr or something similar.

bye achim~ (gentoos most busy memeber)