Kip Warner wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-06-08 at 00:08 +0100, Max Bowsher wrote:
>> Fact: 'make uninstall' requires that you preserve the build directory
>> for when you want to uninstall the package.
> So what? You've got it if you compiled from source anyways.
I treat build directories as temporary artefacts, and delete them after
I've installed something. They are fairly large and of little use after
a successful installation. So, no, I don't have them.
>> As a result, it is too cumbersome to be widely adopted as a general
>> means of package uninstallation.
>> As a result, maintainers are reluctant to bother coding uninstall targets.
> I cannot confirm that at all. Everything from the NIC drivers on my
> system to the games and gnome utilities all have uninstall targets.
>> GNU may mandate it for their own software, uptake of the idea in non-GNU
>> software is severely limited.
> They weren't talking about their own software, but software which uses
> make, as I understood it. Hence why everyone else uses the targets.
>> Any user who expects 'make uninstall' to be present as a matter of
>> course has expectations that correspond poorly to reality.
> If by reality, you are talking about the set of assumptions inside
> developers' heads, who are *RESPONSIBLE* for svn's development, then
> yes, I do have a very poor conception of reality. But understand that it
> all seems very clear to you, but that is only because you are probably
> involved in the project. It is unreasonable to deviate from common
> methodologies when there is no reason to. Even if you can find instances
> where uninstall target is not implemented, it does not change the fact
> that people intuitively expect it. But more importantly, it is useful.
My opinions are formed by the set of software that I typically work
with, in which the uninstall target is a seldom encountered and largely
irrelevant oddity. I do NOT intuitively expect it.
I can only assume that the set of software that you typically work with
is very different to mine, leading to the formation of a strongly
different world-view on this topic between you and I.
Received on Sun Aug 6 02:40:21 2006