[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svnmucc installation bug in Subversion 1.8.0

From: Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 11:16:21 -0400

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Philip Martin
<philip.martin_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com> writes:
>> # Compatibility symlink.
>> # This runs after the target of the same name in build-outputs.mk.
>> $(MKDIR) $(DESTDIR)$(bindir); \
>> test -n "$$SVN_SVNMUCC_IS_SVNSYITF" && \
>> ln -sf svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/svnsyitf$(EXEEXT); \
>> if test "$(DESTDIR)$(bindir)" != "$(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)"; then \
>> ln -sf $(DESTDIR)$(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT)
>> $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \
>> fi
>> Unfortunately, when building RPM's "DESTDIR" is the location of the
>> RPM "BUILDROOT" location, not the atual deployment location. So it
>> needs to be:
>> ln -sf $(bindir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT) $(DESTDIR)$(toolsdir)/svnmucc$(EXEEXT); \
>> So can I safely assume that I just need to patch that for RPM building?
> That should work. I fixed Makefile.in in r1495329.
> Does your binary package include /usr/bin/svn-tools?

Yes, it does. Thanks. The original but of shell scripting is a classic
attempt to have a Makefile outsimart a standard build procedure, and
it's not surprising when these break down in actual package building
environments. In fact, I'm not sure that it *should* be altered for
normal, non-RPM building deployment.
Received on 2013-06-22 17:16:58 CEST

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.