From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Fredrik Staxeng Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Software/HD ecology Date: 22 Dec 2002 11:46:07 +0100 Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <1md6nu9vrk.fsf@Tempo.Update.UU.SE> References: <041220020952400758%ajanta@no.spam> <071220021155280606%ajanta@no.spam> <111220021101520860%ajanta@no.spam> <111220021253524057%ajanta@no.spam> <5l65u0i8zj.fsf@rum.cs.yale.edu> <111220022053507599%ajanta@no.spam> <87u1hjdwta.fsf@hurd.crasseux.com> <121220021324043990%ajanta@no.spam> <171220021132381961%ajanta@no.spam> <3DFFA457.1020103@rcn.com> <844r9b3exh.fsf@lucy.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <87y96m3xhg.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <1mr8ceoypu.fsf@Tempo.Update.UU.SE> <87wum4w7nj.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> <1mfzsrblka.fsf@Tempo.Update.UU.SE> <87y96iwyox.fsf@tc-1-100.kawasaki.gol.ne.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1040554290 6966 80.91.224.249 (22 Dec 2002 10:51:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 10:51:30 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18Q3hP-0001nz-00 for ; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 11:51:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18Q3gp-0006rP-06 for gnu-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2002 05:50:35 -0500 Original-Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.text.tex,gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 53 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.2 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: news.update.uu.se Original-X-Trace: puffinus.its.uu.se 1040552992 news.update.uu.se (22 Dec 2002 11:29:52 +0100) Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!news.algonet.se!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!puffinus.its.uu.se Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu comp.sys.mac.apps:349525 gnu.emacs.help:108415 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+gnu-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:4944 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:4944 Miles Bader writes: >Fredrik Staxeng writes: >> Perhaps I have not made the mechanism clear. The idea was the makefile >> calls "gnu-install package version file dest", instead of install.sh >> or BSD install. This is a simple extension of what is already done >> today. > >No, it's completely obvious what you meant; it's just that you're >over-specifying. Such implementation details are up to the package >maintainers. My proposal is for an external facility, and that packages check for it and use it if available. I think that the main feature of the proposal is that it places minimal burden on the package maintainers. I think that requiring working uninstall targets places a bigger burden on package maintainers. >>From the gcc-3.2 Makefile: uninstall: @echo "the uninstall target is not supported in this tree" >Similarly, the coding standards _don't_ say `you should use autoconf to >make a configure script' (even though that's certainly one of the best >ways to do it, and how it's almost always done), they just say `you >should have a configure script.' Autoconf is one of those things that only get reinvented by people who don't understand how much work went into making it in the first place. I would go a bit further than saying that it is the best way, I think its the only reasonable way. I think the coding standards could recommend autoconf a bit more strongly that they do today. There is nothing in my proposal that requires autoconf. It merely makes it easier to implement support for it. >> I would like to be able to force packages to use a tool that I trust. >> If it is easy enough to do, I would implement support for it and send >> patches to the maintainer. > >If you personally don't want to trust anything that doesn't use a >`gnu-install' script, you're free to only use packages that do. I always do "make -n install" to see what the package wants to install. Partly because of curiosity, I want to know where it puts things, and what those things are. But of course, there is the suspicion that it might do something bad. It has happened in the past, it will happen again. (This does not imply malice on any part, of course) -- Fredrik Stax\"ang | rot13: sfgk@hcqngr.hh.fr