11 Apr
2012
11 Apr
'12
10:06 p.m.
On 04/11/2012 09:23 AM, Steve Davidson wrote:
On the other hand... Adding a soft link (and documenting it - don't ALL
system managers document their system changes???) may be preferred to
changing the makefile because once you change the makefile you OWN its
maintenance. Different strokes for different folks.
In my case, I OWNED its maintenance for the five minutes it remained
in existence, before I deleted the source tree after running "make
install". Fixing where poorly-written Makefiles look for libraries is
UNIX Administration 101.
And why symlinking stuff into non-distribution-standard locations to
compensate for one poorly-written Makefile is a bad idea is 102. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA