On Fri, 13 Jun 1997, Charles Sebold wrote:

> On another note, I am putting together a few of the packages I've compiled,
> but I was wondering if I could get a tip from some of you old-timer
> package-compiler-distributors out there.  The best (and most likely to
> work) way I've found to package the things I've compiled is to do this
> before one would usually type "make install":
> 
> tar cvzf xv-3.10a.tar.gz xv-3.10a/
>          [where xv-3.10.a is the directory I compiled xv in, and
> xv-3.10a.tar.gz is the file I'll be distributing]
> 
> Then when you download that and "tar xvzf" it, all you have to do is go
> into the source directory and type "make install" yourself, assuming you're
> not missing any static libs (which I believe xv would be, actually).
> 
> Of course, with all the object files and what-not, these packages are huge.
> Is there anything to be done (or any tips to make it easier) other than
> looking at the Makefile and deleting all the files that aren't in "make
> install"?

Don't know about anybody else, but my solution has always been to create:
A. a binaries package, consisting of a directory with the binaries and
man pages, possibly with other docs included, like instal docs, etc.
B. a docs package with any other documents, and preferrably text versions
of man pages.  It's also nice to maintain a second copy of this that's not
tarred and gzipped (i.e. a normal directory) so that ppl can cd in and
read information about what the package is, etc. using lynx or other
graphical ftp/web browsers.

It's nice to include in both a pointer to where the sources can be
obtained, rather than including the sources (if they wanted to compile it
on their own, they'd have dl'ed the sources to begin with, probably),
along with any changes you had to make (modified makefiles, etc.), and a
brief description of any special install instructions (i.e. where to place
config files for lynx, pine).

I suspect that many people put binaries in different places from the
default, like /usr/local/bin, and so forth.  It's easy enough to copy/move
files that make install is rarely necessary.  If there are a large number
of files that have to be moved to distinct locations (i.e. >4 destination
paths or so), fine, go with the make install.  It would not be fun
installing packages with that complex an install procedure by hand.  :-)
Otherwise, it's easier to put a README.INSTALL file in the distribution to
mention any required file placement, like config files, and let ppl place
other things where they like.


Thoughts?
David

 /---------------------------------------------------------------------\
|David A. Gatwood                    "My Head or my Heart...  that is   |
|davagatw@mars.utm.edu               the question. To be or not to be   |
|dgatwood@globegate.utm.edu                   is but a trifle."         |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|http://globegate.utm.edu                  http://www.utm.edu/~davagatw |
|http://mars.utm.edu/~davagatw             http://www.nyx.net/~dgatwood |
 \---------------------------------------------------------------------/