Why aren't the various package housecleaning steps included in their install scripts?
by davecan from LinuxQuestions.org on (#4X581)
Many of the sections in the LFS book require some housekeeping steps after installation of a particular component. Some of these are repetitive. For example, 6.25 through 6.27 each require us to manually move a lib to a target dir and then create a symlink. 6.22 and 6.24 each require several specific housecleaning steps to move/link compiled artifacts and those steps are specific to those sections.
Why don't the package authors include these housecleaning steps in their make install targets?
Since I'm not a longtime Linux user or GCC expert, is it normal to have to do these housecleaning activities when not using a package manager in a non-LFS Linux environment? If we download source code and compile in a "normal" non-LFS distro would we be expected to either magically know the steps required to get each package installed or figure them out from reading the docs / source code?
Or are these issues rather specific to LFS and not something we would encounter normally?
Why don't the package authors include these housecleaning steps in their make install targets?
Since I'm not a longtime Linux user or GCC expert, is it normal to have to do these housecleaning activities when not using a package manager in a non-LFS Linux environment? If we download source code and compile in a "normal" non-LFS distro would we be expected to either magically know the steps required to get each package installed or figure them out from reading the docs / source code?
Or are these issues rather specific to LFS and not something we would encounter normally?