Great to hear from ptgrey here!
> >- don't forget ldconfig
> >- add /usr/local/lib in /etc/ld.so.conf
> I was planning to recommend using ./configure --prefix=/usr so the libs
> where they are expected. Bad idea?
Not a bad idea...
Bad idea, imho. after all, /usr/local/ is meant for it for some reasons.
Installing in /usr is nice when it works, but even worse than debugging
installs (one in /usr and one in /usr/local) when it does *not* work. And
reason to install in /usr (as I understand, fresh users), means removing
package *will* be forgotten (or fail, or...).
- people know what they do
- or should learn it.
Writing an extended INSTALL shouldn't be that hard (PATH, ld.conf or
MANPATH), though I admit there's a myriad of different PATHs that linux
I'm a fervent debian user at home, my current install (with two
hundreds if not a thousand upgrades) is more than five years old. Hence I
may come across
as a bit paranoia about messing with the base install (installing from
source in /usr).
On Thu, 2004-12-23 at 02:33, Don Murray wrote:
> kero.van.gelder@... wrote:
> >Bad idea, imho. after all, /usr/local/ is meant for it for some reasons.
> Good points to think about, Kero, thanks!
The only advantage would be to remove one installation step (ld.so.conf
modification). I also think it's better to install it in /usr/local/
_ Damien 'Takahara' Douxchamps
('- Post-doctoral investigator
//\ Image Processing Group, Nara Institute of Science and Technology