Re: coreutils and GNU_PROGRAM_PREFIX

["Filip Hajny" <filip%joyent.com@localhost>]

On 30. 5. 2012, at 15:12, Aleksey Cheusov wrote:

>> devel/binutils
>> lang/gawk
>> textproc/groff
>> wip/binutils
> 
> binutils from pkgsrc and wip uses the same variable name
> GNU_PROGRAM_PREFIX for a bit different purposes. So, I didn't touch
> it.

Actually, binutils use GNU_PROGRAM_PREFIX for the same purpose (the default 
prefix for all binaries). I can fix them - so that prefix-less symlinks are 
created under ${PREFIX}/gnu/bin too.

>> Groff needs some patching, because its configure has a logic that tries
>> to detect an existing troff installation, which typically succeeds on most
>> SunOS platforms (resulting in 'g' prefix being used), but fails on e.g.
>> SmartOS (and no prefix is used). The rest are easy and should be just a
>> matter of hard coding the prefix and adding the symlink logic.
> 
> If you think groff it's broken on SmartOS, feel free to fix it.

There is a non-configurable test in groff's configure that will force a 
g-prefix on troff and related binaries, if an existing troff passes the test, 
otherwise an empty prefix is forced. Given how this is handled in the pkgsrc 
PLIST, it's expected that only SunOS will pass the test (not true anymore with 
SmartOS), whereas other operating systems will end up with prefix-less groff 
binaries.

I feel this should be fixed to align with the change you introduced, i.e. force 
the prefix and add symlinks. I'm concerned about the rest of the world where an 
not having nroff/troff under ${PREFIX}/bin might break things. Maybe I should 
only fix the SunOS part so that the prefix is never introduced, making groff 
behave consistently on all operating systems, the non-SunOS way?

-F