On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Norman Gray wrote:
> Tim,
>
> On 2005 Apr 13 , at 00.48, Tim Jenness wrote:
>
> > Whatever happens, we can't expect users of our dists to have to write
> > special acinclude.m4 files or run special starconf. If they were doing
> > that they could use CVS.
>
> I don't expect them to do anything remotely like that. The person or
> process which _builds_ the dist tarball has to do something to make
> sure that the default --prefix is /star. They can actually do it by
> _not_ specifying STARCONF_DEFAULT_{STARLINK,PREFIX} when they do the
> top-level ./bootstrap, since /star is what both of these default to.
but if I have a distribution that has /star hard-wired in it and I'm a
user who doesn't want to install into /star (like most people without root
access) that doesn't help me at all.
>
> The whole fuss in the README about setting these variables is about how
> to make the default prefix be something other than /star. To build the
> dist tarball, all you really have to do is miss out that bit of the
> README when you do your top-level bootstrap.
>
> > Can we make the --with-starlink=/star option do something useful?
> > Telling people to use --prefix and --with-starlink=$MY_STARLINK is
> > perfectly acceptable to a configure user and it fits in with the
> > standard
> > usage (use this Starlink, since I might not have the original build
> > starlink).
>
> That's precisely what --with-starlink does.
>
If --with-starlink=/stardev2 works then what are we debating? I thought
Steve was saying that --with-starlink didn't help the build in the
parallel tree.
--
Tim Jenness
JAC software
http://www.jach.hawaii.edu/~timj
|