Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Staged installs support. #2850

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

ioga
Copy link

@ioga ioga commented Apr 4, 2014

Some package managers (f.e., gentoo portage) require staged install support:
i.e. installation of files into some temporary location (prefix).
This changeset adds support of that feature via DESTDIR variable.
Also see https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/DESTDIR.html .

Related haxelib commit: HaxeFoundation/haxelib#128

Some package managers (f.e., gentoo portage) require staged install support:
i.e. installation of files into some temporary location (prefix).
This changeset adds support of that feature via DESTDIR variable.
Also see https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/DESTDIR.html .
@waneck
Copy link
Member

waneck commented Apr 4, 2014

The changes seem ok. But is there any particular reason to go through the trouble of making a symbolic link to haxelib_script.sh , only to make it readlink -f to get its path? What was wrong with generating the script on-the-fly at the install?

@ioga
Copy link
Author

ioga commented Apr 4, 2014

@waneck
In the autogenerated script you'd have a fixed absolute path of haxelib classpath, so it could be run only if it's installed in that fixed location (i.e. /usr/lib/haxe).

Symlink can be installed to any place, and it would work properly as long as it valid.
readlink -f resolves the symlink, which gets you the location of haxelib_src installation, and you don't need to worry about its install path any more.

Also, I believe it's not very pretty to have haxelib (which is a submodule, i.e. intended to be more independent) implementation detail (i.e. script body) in the install section of haxe makefile.

Does it make sense?

andyli pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 27, 2015
without the haxelib symlink change
@andyli
Copy link
Member

andyli commented Aug 27, 2015

I've just committed it without the haxelib change.
haxelib is fragile and I don't want to break anything. It will probably be improved when addressing HaxeFoundation/haxelib#172.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants