Re: [PATCH] respect configured prefix instead of hardcoded /etc

[James Peach <jamespeach@xxxxxxx>]

On 03/04/2008, at 4:23 PM, Max Matveev wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:26:32 -0700, James Peach wrote:
>
> JP> commit f3d97e64f2774ea4414c0556e17d7fdd83e30df6
> JP> Author: James Peach <jpeach@xxxxxxxxx>
> JP> Date:   Thu Apr 3 13:22:11 2008 -0700
>
> JP>      Use the prefix-relative etc directory instead of harcoding / 
> etc.
> JP> diff --git a/GNUmakefile b/GNUmakefile
> JP> index a945efd..077f105 100644
> JP> --- a/GNUmakefile
> JP> +++ b/GNUmakefile
> JP> @@ -104,6 +104,7 @@ endif
> JP>          $(INSTALL) -m 755 -d $(PCP_SHARE_DIR)/lib
> JP>          $(INSTALL) -m 755 -d $(PCP_SHARE_DIR)/examples
> JP>          $(INSTALL) -m 755 -d $(PCP_INC_DIR)
> JP> +        $(INSTALL) -m 755 -d $(PCP_ETC_DIR)
> That would make pcp the owner of /etc on Linux: pcp does not have its
> own /etc/pcp directory and splats its files around the shared
> directory.
>
> Also, /etc/pcp.conf is hardcoded deliberately to avoid chicken'n'egg
> problem finding the source of information about relocation which can
> be relocatable itself.
So why does the hard-coded location have to be /etc/pcp.conf? Why  
can't it be a build-time setting?
It seems that as long at it's well-known and hard-coded it shouldn't  
matter much what it is ....