pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] fche/prefix branch on pcpfans.git

To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] fche/prefix branch on pcpfans.git
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:24:36 +1000 (EST)
Cc: pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20120713210843.GC14467@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Frank,


Hi, guys -

Some progress on the pcp --prefix=PATH work for
<http://oss.sgi.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=921> may be found in the
pcpfans.git fche/prefix branch.  The gist of the change is that

Good to see alot of stuff being removed from configure.in

Looks like you started on cleaning up some unused PCP_X11_* macros -
there are several more of those toward the end of builddefs.in that can also
go (I think - can't see any user either, they probably predate pcp-gui being
changed to be more "qmake" based).

% autoconf
% ./configure --prefix=/some/random/directory

approximately works to create a self-contained working pcp/pmcd
installation (with the setting of a handful of environment variables).

The top level GNUmakefile no longer invokes ./configure; that is left
to a developer, or to the Makepkgs packager frontend.  It's getting
Hmm - there still seems to be a pcp_configure target in the top level makefile
allowing this? - we probably should remove that (sounds like the intention).
The debian/rules file will need an update, cos it uses that... but I can do that
once I know that pcp_configure is intended to go (or should that instead now
become "configure --prefix=/usr" to make life simpler for distributors?).  I'm
not fussed either way.

ready for testing on non-linux platforms.  Some of them may need a
greater set of --with-FOOdir type new configure options added to match
the previous behaviors.

Please take a look and give it a try.  I hope to work on this more
intensely for the next little while, perchance to get it merged in
time for the next pcp minor release.

There is likely to be a bugfix point release within a couple of days to get some
fixes out here, next train after that is probably the go.  We'll need to get the big
platform builds (deb/rpm/mac, maybe Solaris if Ken/Max get a chance) sorted
out before then I think ... seems feasible though.

cheers.

--
Nathan
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>