[GRASS-dev] Re: [DebianGIS] build-indep for grass and other
paul-grass at stjohnspoint.co.uk
Mon Nov 13 02:41:24 EST 2006
On Sun, 12 Nov 2006, Hamish wrote:
> Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
>> Also having a better management of libraries would be nice. Libtool
>> could be complex but not evil as having no versioned libraries at all.
>> AFAIK there is not anything that can be defined a 'grass library'
>> with a stable versioned API.
> this post from a week ago may be of interest:
Aha - so perhaps Markus or whoever added the version numbering into the
library names did it because of Debian? I still don't think it's necessary
because if a user has more than one GRASS version installed at once they
are put in different directories.
IIUC is it true that the reason for making this fuss over version
numbering and file locations is that Debian wants to install GRASS files
in various places distributed across the system filesystem, rather than
all one place? This is not a design assumption that has been made and
would be a rather huge and pointless job to fix anyway - almost every part
of GRASS assumes there is a $GISBASE directory under which the whole
system is contained.
That's not to say it doesn't comply with a convention: the GRASS
installation directory is (as I understand it) like a /opt-style
directory, an add-on software package that includes its whole system under
there, and the system-specific startup script (which really just contains
the path to the GRASS installation directory) goes in /usr/local/bin. Neat
and tidy. And different GRASS versions can be installed in different
directories and have different startup scritps. I really think that is
quite a simple and convenient solution the way it is? Well as Hamish says
some things could be tidied, but not worth changing it just for the sake
of it I think.
More information about the grass-dev