Jonathan Craig <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Maciej Bliziński <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ben Walton wrote: >>> Excerpts from Maciej (Matchek) Bliziński's message of Sun Feb 26 09:18:12 >>> -0500 2012: >>> >>> Hi Maciej, >>> >>> The idea is good and we should definitely accommodate this nicely. I >>> don't like /opt/csw/gcc, but I haven't got a better name that doesn't >>> also suffer from: >>> >>> 1. Top level directory proliferation. >>> 2. Confusion with /opt/csw/gcc[34]. >> >> Maybe /opt/csw/lib/gcc would be a better location? I've experimented >> with this in the past, with mixed results. Software packages generally >> like their layout being modified by --prefix, and not by --libdir. >> > > As I understand it the issue is with ABI interoperability between > compiled c++ code from different compilers. As such should we use > /opt/csw/lib/gxx rather than gcc? This would be more indicative of > gnu c++ libraries rather than gnu libraries in general. It would be > nice to avoid a new top level directory such as /opt/csw/gcc as this > feels cluttered .
+1 for gxx /opt/csw/gxx is also a good prefix; what's the point with cluttered top level? -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
