After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 324283 - Fix to bug 318928 breaks gnopernicus sandbox installs
Fix to bug 318928 breaks gnopernicus sandbox installs
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnopernicus
Classification: Deprecated
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: remus draica
firm
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-12-16 16:54 UTC by Ed Catmur
Modified: 2006-05-08 14:08 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.13/2.14


Attachments
Use $(sysconfdir)/$(sysconfsubdir) in Makefiles (2.72 KB, patch)
2005-12-16 16:55 UTC, Ed Catmur
committed Details | Review
Another patch to do the same. (3.44 KB, patch)
2006-03-25 22:36 UTC, Julio Merino
committed Details | Review

Description Ed Catmur 2005-12-16 16:54:18 UTC
Gentoo installs packages to a staging area, for sandboxing.

The fix to bug 318928 breaks this since it prevents 

    make install sysconfdir=${D}/etc

from working. Easy fix
Comment 1 Ed Catmur 2005-12-16 16:55:39 UTC
Created attachment 56079 [details] [review]
Use $(sysconfdir)/$(sysconfsubdir) in Makefiles
Comment 2 remus draica 2006-02-01 08:39:09 UTC
Comment on attachment 56079 [details] [review]
Use $(sysconfdir)/$(sysconfsubdir) in Makefiles

Patch looks fine. Please apply.
Comment 3 Oana Serb 2006-02-08 10:22:44 UTC
Patch committed to CVS head.
Comment 4 Julio Merino 2006-03-25 22:36:35 UTC
Created attachment 62010 [details] [review]
Another patch to do the same.

I'm curious to know how the patch I'm attaching looks because I was the submitter of bug 318928.

It is supposed to achieve the same thing as the previous patch but using gnopernicusconfdir, which is, in my opinion, cleaner.  Why?  Because it uses a single variable and does not lead to confusion (specially while writing new code).  It should now work because I changed the assignment to not expand its contents (note the single quotes) and add the required variables to the Makefile files (see the new AC_SUBST call).
Comment 5 Julio Merino 2006-03-25 22:47:13 UTC
OK, I've just tried the same fix I posted here (but in gdm's code) and it worked appropriately.  Might you apply it?  :-)
Comment 6 Ed Catmur 2006-03-26 01:13:11 UTC
I'm having trouble seeing what the point is. It's less clean in that it introduces an extra variable that uses a single-quote hack to delay expansion. I also don't see where confusion is liable to arise with the current code.
Comment 7 Julio Merino 2006-03-26 08:20:04 UTC
Confusion in that "oh, I have to remember to use two different variables to specify where to install config files, where one typically just uses sysconfdir alone".  Yes, gnopernicusconfdir is a new, nonstandard variable, but it is clear that it contains the path to the config dir, no matter how it was internally set.  Well, not a big issue really and you could turn this around to say that it is more confusing this way.

But please note that this is not a "single-quote hack".  It is the correct way to define variables that hold paths in Autoconf/Automake, and the reason is to allow what you wanted in the first place.  This is documented somewhere in the Autoconf/Automake info manuals, but I can't find it now...
Comment 8 remus draica 2006-03-28 07:33:27 UTC
Please reopen bugs when the fix is incomplete, etc. Otherwise it will not appear in the appropriate list and is posible to miss you comments, work etc.
Comment 9 remus draica 2006-05-08 14:07:52 UTC
Comment on attachment 62010 [details] [review]
Another patch to do the same.

patch applied on cvs head.