Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Require "prefix", allow absolute prefixes #85

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2024
Merged

Conversation

mwoehlke
Copy link
Member

@mwoehlke mwoehlke commented Nov 7, 2024

Add a semi-optional prefix attribute which can be used to specify an absolute prefix (for non-relocatable packages). Require that exactly one of cps_path or the new prefix is supplied. Improve documentation on how to determine the prefix from cps_path, and drop no-longer-needed guessing mechanisms. Remove "install" from "package [install] prefix", as packages aren't necessarily "installed".

This is slightly more complicated in some ways, but does enforce that the CPS file itself always provides a substitution for @prefix@, which allows for some other simplifications. Note that, despite the seemingly minimal change to the schema, this is in some respects a significant breaking change in that something formerly optional is now required.

Closes #84.

Add a semi-optional `prefix` attribute which can be used to specify an
absolute prefix (for non-relocatable packages). Require that exactly one
of `cps_path` or the new `prefix` is supplied. Improve documentation on
how to determine the prefix from `cps_path`, and drop no-longer-needed
guessing mechanisms. Remove "install" from "package [install] prefix",
as packages aren't necessarily "installed".

This is slightly more complicated in some ways, but does enforce that
the CPS file itself always provides a substitution for `@prefix@`, which
allows for some other simplifications. Note that, despite the seemingly
minimal change to the schema, this is in some respects a significant
breaking change in that something formerly optional is now required.
Copy link
Collaborator

@bretbrownjr bretbrownjr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense to me. This should make it simpler to implement a tool that consumes CPS meaningfully.

@mwoehlke mwoehlke merged commit fbc7924 into master Dec 9, 2024
3 checks passed
@mwoehlke mwoehlke deleted the require-prefix branch December 9, 2024 20:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Should a "prefix" be required, even for non-relocatable packages?
2 participants