Installation location of Perl and Python modules
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Installation location of Perl and Python modules |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.30.0109111749540.680-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Installation location of Perl and Python modules
Re: Installation location of Perl and Python modules Re: Installation location of Perl and Python modules |
Список | pgsql-general |
I need a user poll regarding a PostgreSQL 7.2 development issue. In what follows I only speak of Perl, but you may substitute Python almost everywhere. There have been complaints that the Perl module automatically installs itself under /usr/lib/perl5, even if the installer is not the root user and even if he specified a different --prefix. It would naturally be beneficial if users without root access, or those that don't want to overwrite their system installation, had the chance to install the Perl module somewhere, somehow. The question is which of the following installation schemes would be useful to provide, and which one should be the default. 1. Install it under /usr/lib/perl5 (or whatever the default location). 2. Install it under $prefix/lib/perl5, where $prefix is what is chosen for PostgreSQL. This would improve the likelyhood of write access to the location, give you a perlish layout, and (usually) fall back to the default if you specify --prefix=/usr. It might also be rather compliant to some file system standard. 3. Install it under $prefix/lib/postgresql. This would guarantee write access, and enhance the consistency with the GNU-style configure process. It could also be compliant to some file system standard. 4. Provide an option to freely choose the location. But keep in mind that "free to choose" also means "inconsistent" and "easy to get lost". Anything but #1 will require setting the environment variable PERLLIB or use -I flags or some such. This is not inconsistent with the requirement to set PATH, MANPATH, etc., at least if Perl were to search something in /usr/local by default. Currently, we have #1 as the default and incomplete, hidden support for #3. If we were to start in a green field we might make #2 the default with an option for #4. The questions are, "what would users expect" and "what would users like"? -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net http://funkturm.homeip.net/~peter
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: