[Mono-devel-list] gacutil flags revisited
Christopher James Lahey
clahey at ximian.com
Wed Nov 3 14:00:00 EST 2004
Le mercredi 03 novembre 2004 à 12:19 +0530, Raja R Harinath a écrit :
> Mike Kestner <mkestner at ximian.com> writes:
> > I'd like to revisit a nagging problem related to gacutil.
> > The current implementation of gacutil provides two flags that are
> > similar but are a constant source of confusion related to gac
> > installation. To specify a specific gac path, you can provide either
> > -root or -gacdir.
> > The difference between the two is related to the additional use of a
> > -package flag. If you use -root, the link to the installed assembly
> > that is created in the -package dir is "redirected" to the system
> > gacdir. This allows for packaging builds which are installed to
> > temporary directories but end up with unbroken links when "redirected"
> > by the package installer. Think DESTDIR.
> > -gacdir on the other hand makes -package links point at the assembly
> > path as installed. Think make install from source without DESTDIR.
> Actually, I think we should probably get rid of -gacdir and just use
> relative links rather than absolute links. -root should still be used,
> and it can use $(DESTDIR).
> Currently, my prefix=$HOME, and
> points to
> IMO, it should be changed to point to
> instead. This will be valid even in the DESTDIR.
> As a bonus, it will help us work-around b0rked build-buddy packaging
> scripts that choose to use stuff like
> make install prefix=$DESTDIR/usr bindir=$DESTDIR/usr/bin
> Going further, it would be nice if 'gacutil' supported a mode that is
> almost like /usr/bin/install.
> gacutil -install foo.dll $(DESTDIR)$(gacrootdir)
> works like
> gacutil -i -root $(DESTDIR)$(gacrootdir) foo.dll
> So, we can say, with a new enough automake,
> gacrootdir = $(libdir)
> gacroot_DATA = foo.dll bar.dll
> gacroot_INSTALL = $(GACUTIL) -install
> For some reason, I thoroughly dislike the idea of reading an environment
> variable named DESTDIR.
> - Hari
This is fine with me. What about with older Makefile.am? More
importantly, how soon could this go in? Would it go into the 1.0 tree?
More information about the Mono-devel-list