I had a discussion about this with Ross the other day (only it pertained to
amber/lib instead of amber/include, but it's the same idea). The problem
is that with no --prefix, amber/include and amber/lib are the de-facto
install locations, and I don't think "clean" typically gets those files for
most packages. I agree that it typically does get them if you don't do a
"make install", but lacking a --prefix option (and relocatable code in
general), clean and uninstall begin to step on each others' toes.
Of course the problem is that items in our include/ and lib/ folder are
targets for certain rules, so I agree it's a dilemma. However, does "make
uninstall" kill those? I don't know what the best (most expected) option
is here...
All the best,
Jason
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Scott Brozell <sbrozell.rci.rutgers.edu>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been stalled several times in the last few days because
> amber/include never gets cleaned.
> It seems to me on principle that amber/Makefile clean targets
> should clean amber/include.
>
> In many user scenarios not cleaning amber/include is ok,
> but users could have problems if they use multiple compilers.
>
> scott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
--
Jason M. Swails
Quantum Theory Project,
University of Florida
Ph.D. Candidate
352-392-4032
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Mar 20 2012 - 16:00:06 PDT
