[uClibc]Re: uclibc tool installation

[Miles Bader]

David Schleef <ds at schleef.org> writes:
> Can't you just install them to a separate directory, as per the
> default?

Yeah, as Erik pointed out; I had disabled this feature and not realized it!

I do think the default values are quite confusing, in that
distinguishing between one set of names and the other by putting the
`exportable' (non-conflicting) names in a subtree called `usr' seems
slightly wierd.  It would be nice to know the reasoning behind this, in
case there's something I'm missing.

By contrast, with binutils/gcc (as I understand them), the `exported'
names (ARCH-TOOL) into a general bin directory (e.g., /usr/local/bin),
and they won't conflict with native tools or other cross tools because
of the target-specific prefix.  Then the short aliases are put into a
bin directory in a target-specific subdirectory of the same tree, which
you could add them to your path if you want.  This makes quite a bit
sense to me, at least in a cross-compilation environment.

Is there some common scenario for which the default uClibc scheme is
better suited?  How do people generally set up their environment?

[BTW, I'm not at work right now, so I can't actually confirm any of
the details I've given above; I hope I didn't make any mistakes...]

-Miles
-- 
"Most attacks seem to take place at night, during a rainstorm, uphill,
 where four map sheets join."   -- Anon. British Officer in WW I