Re: %files directive with relocation in %install

[bob proulx com (Bob Proulx)]

Michael Jennings wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > If not then probably defining _prefix is better.
> >   %define _prefix /usr/local
> > In which case change prefix to _prefix throughout the file.
> >   s/%{prefix}/%{_prefix}/g
> 
> No, don't do this.  Packages which (misguidedly) go in /usr/local
> should not redefine %{_prefix}.  In fact, no package should redefine
> %{_prefix}.

I think we are both agreed that packaging an rpm with files in
/usr/local is undesirable.  I chose not to push that point because
people keep trying to do it.  But I never create packages that include
/usr/local.  That should be reserved for local hacks.  Which I read as
meaing 'make install' directly.

I use /opt/local for truly local packages.  In which case I *do* want
to redefine _prefix.  If I were to package something in /usr/local
(agreed, a bad idea) then I would certainly force it with that
redefinition.  If I want to force /opt/local for my prefix then I also
need to make that work.  Remember, if I want to avoid using /usr then
I don't want to use the rpm macros file definition and must supply my
own.  Otherwise I can't use the %configure and %makeinstall macros and
that would be worse.

Bob