[FFmpeg-cvslog] r21226 - in trunk: Makefile common.mak subdir.mak

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 03:44:20AM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 03:17:53AM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >> Baptiste Coudurier <baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > On 1/15/10 11:26 AM, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 08:16:28PM +0100, ramiro wrote:
> >> >>> Author: ramiro
> >> >>> Date: Fri Jan 15 20:16:28 2010
> >> >>> New Revision: 21226
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Log:
> >> >>> Get one step closer to world domination.
> >> >>> Remove "make uninstall".
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm all for a joke, but how about at least printing something
> >> >> useful in addition (if you really want after a sleep 1) like
> >> >> "Actually this way of uninstalling is just too unreliable, consider
> >> >> using a tool like (whatever Mans mentioned) and look in .... for
> >> >> files to manually remove").
> >> >
> >> > Well, I'm all for a joke as well. However I do use make uninstall and
> >> > I know why I'm using it. For example I want to remove the .a from a
> >> > static compilation because I want to test shared libs, or vice versa.
> >> 
> >> That sounds like using the wrong tool for the job.  If you don't want
> >> static libs, use --disable-static.  I don't even see how uninstall
> >> could possibly be of relevance to what you seem to be describing.
> > [...]
> >> > Printing the message is fine with me, but keep the uninstall working.
> >> > Thanks for your understanding.
> >> 
> >> Keeping it working takes effort.  I will not waste my time on
> >> something that already has superior solutions.
> >
> > I also think the uninstall target was usefull to some users.
> 
> It was dangerous.  Whatever people may have used if for, there are
> better ways to do it.

Telling people an unhelpful joke is worse.
Worse to them, as some might not know what to do, some might not even
understand the joke if they havnt seen the movie.
And worse to ffmpeg as it makes the project look quite hostile to its
users

If instead of this joke a text explaining an alternative solution to the
user where presented this would be better.
Of course if that text is along the lines of "you should have installed
package Y before installing ffmpeg so its installation is loged and can
be undone" then again this isnt helpfull to the user because its too late
by that time.


> 
> > Would you be ok with baptiste putting it back and maintaining it?
> 
> No.  It's not practical to have different people maintaining their own
> little fragments of the makefiles.  Besides, I'm against having that
> target there at all.

what about a seperate uninstall script?
the script gets installed with the other parts and the installed script
is run on uninstall and then removed

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.
-- Aristotle
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-cvslog/attachments/20100126/a242604c/attachment.pgp>