Re: [POLL] Who likes running Git without make install?

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Jul 3, 2006, 06:54 UTC
Message-ID: <7vslljrxe0.fsf_-_@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060701235906.GE29115@pasky.or.cz>

Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Well, yes, it is ugly, but it was really cool that we could have used
> Git without installing it anywhere.
>
> But perhaps that's just me refusing to break his old ways of doing
> things. Does anyone else care about it? (And why?)

I do not think you need to break your old ways. Perhaps a patch like this might help.

-- >8 --
INSTALL: a tip for running after building but without installing.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
---

diff --git a/INSTALL b/INSTALL
index f8337e2..ed502de 100644
--- a/INSTALL
+++ b/INSTALL
@@ -29,6 +29,19 @@ Issues of note:
    has been actively developed since 1997, and people have moved over to
    graphical file managers.
 
+ - You can use git after building but without installing if you
+   wanted to.  Various git commands need to find other git
+   commands and scripts to do their work, so you would need to
+   arrange a few environment variables to tell them that their
+   friends will be found in your built source area instead of at
+   their standard installation area.  Something like this works
+   for me:
+
+	GIT_EXEC_PATH=`pwd`
+	PATH=`pwd`:$PATH
+	PERL5LIB=`pwd`/perl/blib/lib:`pwd`/perl/blib/arch/auto/Git
+	export GIT_EXEC_PATH PATH PERL5LIB
+
  - Git is reasonably self-sufficient, but does depend on a few external
    programs and libraries: