From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pg_config/share_dir |
Date: | 2005-09-08 01:29:11 |
Message-ID: | 200509080329.12628.peter_e@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm wondering why localedir is even treated as an independently
> settable directory in the first place. Why doesn't the code just use
> PGSHAREDIR and plaster on a hardwired "/locale"?
You can't really set localedir independently; it's hardwired to
$prefix/share/locale (see config/program.m4 for details). The reason
that it's dealt with separately from $datadir ($prefix/share) is to
arrive at a conventional layout when prefix=/usr (or /usr/local etc.).
datadir would then be /usr/share/postgresql and localedir would
be /usr/share/locale. This is just the way most software arranges
these things. Earlier versions of gettext (or non-GNU versions of
gettext?) also had a hard-coded path where it looked for the locale
data, which sort of lead to the convention that the locale files have
to be in that particular directory.
> Certainly we make only minimal use of sysconfdir at present. But we
> have the infrastructure for it in configure, path.c, etc, and it
> seems to me that pg_config support should be considered part of that
> infrastructure. If it's not important enough to be in pg_config, why
> is it a separate option at all?
I'd say that the nonexposure of sysconfdir is an oversight.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-08 01:37:13 | Re: initdb profiles |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-09-08 01:22:55 | Re: [HACKERS] How to determine date / time of last postmaster restart |