bug-standards
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Support for architecture-independent binaries


From: Karl Berry
Subject: Re: Support for architecture-independent binaries
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:41:38 GMT

Hi Reuben (and all),

This question has been around since day one, of course.

My feeling is that it would be much too intrusive and incompatible to
change bin_SCRIPTS to be installed to a --prefix-based path instead of
an --exec-prefix path.  There are legitimate reasons for wanting to have
them in either place, and nothing much in this regard has changed since
the decision was made umpteen years ago, so I don't see a reason to
break with the past now.

What I did in some of my packages in pre-Automake days was have a
separate $(scriptdir) as the target install dir for scripts.  The
default was $(bindir) but it was obviously easy to override to an
arch-independent place when desired for a particular package.

Automake/Autoconf could do that if they wish, since it's merely an
addition to the existing variables, after all.  OTOH, if Ralf doesn't
see a problem with it, we could also propose it to rms for inclusion.

I did a quick search of the bug-standards archive and didn't turn up any
previous discussion of this, though that's hardly conclusive, of course.

Best,
Karl



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]