* David Schleef <ds@...> [2003-12-07 11:57]:
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2003 at 11:53:23AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> > * David Schleef <ds@...> [2003-12-06 15:01]:
> > > It's pretty standard to use 'make install
> > > prefix=/some/temporary/path/usr', and this is the only change
> > > necessary to support that.
> > Isn't 'make install DESTDIR=/some/temporary/path' better? My understanding
> > is that prefix should rather be specified by the --prefix option to
> > configure.
> Both are used.
I analyzed your proposal further. I noticed that when issuing:
make install prefix=/some/temporary/path/usr
The DOCDIR variable in the Makefiles *_does_* get the
"/some/temporary/path/usr" prefix, what makes your proposal moot.
Besides, after configuring with --prefix=/usr, I see here:
$ fgrep "DIR ="Makefile | grep -v "\(INCLUDE\|LIB\)DIR"| grep /usr
BIN_DIR = /usr/bin
INCLUDE_DIR = /usr/include/plplot
LIB_DIR = /usr/lib
OCTAVE_M_DIR = /usr/share/octave/site/m
OCTAVE_OCT_DIR = /usr/lib/octave/site/oct/i386-pc-linux-gnu
PLPLOT_OCTAVE_DIR = /usr/share/plplot_octave
PYTHON_INC_DIR = /usr/include/python2.3
PYTHON_INSTDIR = /usr/lib/python2.3/site-packages
PYTHON_NUM_DIR = /usr/include/python2.3/Numeric
TCL_DIR = /usr/lib/plplot5.2.1/tcl
This means that setting the prefix variable when calling make is totally
useless for the installation directories above. Using DESTDIR does work,
The question is: should we extend your proposal to the variables above or
should we let things as they are?