From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bernhard Fischer Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:04:15 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] Install to /lib usr /usr/lib ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070713120414.GA32559@aon.at> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 05:48:30PM +0200, Julien Letessier wrote: >Dear buildroot maintainers, > >For the relative newcomer I am, there seems to be a lot of >inconsistency in buildroot for package installation directories. > >>>From what I undrestand, the policy is to install packages: >* under $(STAGING_DIR)/{bin,lib,include} and $(STAGING_DIR)/{bin,lib} >for the toolchain (e.g. uclibc) No, this is not correct. Everything that goes to $(STAGING_DIR)/include is wrong, it should be in $(STAGING_DIR)/usr/include Most of the packages should install into $(STAGING_DIR)/usr, a few exceptions are allowed to go to $(STAGING_DIR)/lib (uClibc et al, refer to your host for examples). >* under $(STAGING_DIR)/usr/{bin,lib,include} and >$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/{bin,lib} for other packages (e.g. gtk) > >Is this correct? The scheme that is supposed to be used is to match a usual host as close as possible. Some packages put their *.a into /usr/lib while they put their *.so into /lib. Following this for the staging_dir is ok iff your host hints it. > >If so, we have a problem. >Half the of the package/*/*.mk use one option, half use the other. The consistency is relatively new, alot of packages still do install into $(STAGING_DIR) directly and have to be fixed to install into $(STAGING_DIR)/usr. I corrected some already, patches to fix the rest are very welcome. >As I "svn uped" today, the fontconfig package I had a hard time >patching broke, because expat decided AGAIN to install directly under >/lib. > >Please, please establish a clear policy on this, so we can start >submiting patches