Subject: Re: unexpected behaviour of PKG_CONFIG=no ...
To: Luke Mewburn <lukem@NetBSD.org>
From: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
Date: 04/22/2004 23:10:41
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 21:49:08 +1000
Luke Mewburn <lukem@NetBSD.org> wrote:
> Why not unconditionally install all SUPPORT_FILES and
> conditionally (based on PKG_CONFIG!=NO (?)) install CONF_FILES.
> Otherwise, what's the effective difference between CONF_FILES
> and SUPPORT_FILES, other than the variable name?
# CONF_FILES are pairs of example and true config files, used much like
# MLINKS in the base system. At post-install time, if the true config
# file doesn't exist, then the example one is copied into place. At
# deinstall time, the true one is removed if it doesn't differ from the
# example one. SUPPORT_FILES is used the same way, but the package
# admin isn't prompted to customize the file at post-install time.
I guess there may be some situations where it may be interesting to use
SUPPORT_FILES to install files under PKG_SYSCONFDIR... or maybe not... so
enabling their installation unconditionally doesn't seem TRT (WRT PKG_CONFIG
Julio M. Merino Vidal <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The NetBSD Project - http://www.NetBSD.org/