# Re: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile 5 messages from 2006-12-11 to 2006-12-12. Participants: Johannes Schindelin, Andy Parkins. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/43372 ## Andy Parkins, 2006-12-11 22:14 Subject: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile Message-ID: <200612112214.09735.andyparkins@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200612112214.09735.andyparkins%40gmail.com ``` Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins --- Makefile | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index a1861de..51c1747 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -821,6 +821,20 @@ install-doc: $(MAKE) -C Documentation install +### Uninstallation rules + +uninstall: + rm -f $(subst %,$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(gitexecdir_SQ)/%,$(ALL_PROGRAMS)) + rm -f '$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(bindir_SQ)/git$X' + rm -f '$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(bindir_SQ)/gitk' + $(MAKE) -C templates DESTDIR='$(DESTDIR_SQ)' uninstall + $(MAKE) -C perl uninstall + if test 'z$(bindir_SQ)' != 'z$(gitexecdir_SQ)'; \ + then \ + rm -f '$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(gitexecdir_SQ)/git$X' + rm -f '$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(gitexecdir_SQ)/git$X'; \ + fi + $(foreach p,$(BUILT_INS), rm -f '$(DESTDIR_SQ)$(gitexecdir_SQ)/$p';) ### Maintainer's dist rules -- 1.4.4.1.geeee8 ``` ## Johannes Schindelin, 2006-12-12 12:25 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.63.0612121325000.2807%40wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de In-Reply-To: <200612112214.09735.andyparkins@gmail.com> ``` Hi, see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/8682 for a discussion about an uninstall target. Ciao, Dscho ``` ## Andy Parkins, 2006-12-12 12:51 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile Message-ID: <200612121251.33051.andyparkins@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200612121251.33051.andyparkins%40gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` On Tuesday 2006 December 12 12:25, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/8682 for a > discussion about an uninstall target. I read that thread, but don't see its relevance. Have I missed something? In summary: "uninstall" is not useful in lieu of a package manager, but for developer types (like those on this mailing list) it is useful when you install in the wrong place (as I did just before I felt the need for an uninstall recipe). The thread you linked to seemed to want the uninstall to not have hard-coded filenames. That's what I did. I assume I've missed something in the linked thread - what was it you wanted me to pick up from it? Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE ``` ## Johannes Schindelin, 2006-12-12 14:15 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.63.0612121512060.2807%40wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de In-Reply-To: <200612121251.33051.andyparkins@gmail.com> ``` Hi, On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Andy Parkins wrote: > I assume I've missed something in the linked thread - what was it you > wanted me to pick up from it? The uninstall target _only_ solves the case you mentioned: when you installed Git in the wrong place. But then it is fragile: if you put the new path into config.mak, or you provided the PREFIX on the command line, and possibly do not remember what it was, the uninstall goes wrong. But then, I do not care at all about that target being in the Makefile or not. I'll just ignore it, just as almost everybody else. Ciao, Dscho ``` ## Andy Parkins, 2006-12-12 15:42 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Uninstall rule for top level Makefile Message-ID: <200612121542.09259.andyparkins@gmail.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/200612121542.09259.andyparkins%40gmail.com In-Reply-To: ``` On Tuesday 2006 December 12 14:15, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > The uninstall target _only_ solves the case you mentioned: when you > installed Git in the wrong place. But then it is fragile: if you put the > new path into config.mak, or you provided the PREFIX on the command line, > and possibly do not remember what it was, the uninstall goes wrong. Absolutely. I agree entirely. The only reason I raised it was because I had cause to need it. The quickest way I found was just to write the missing recipe. As I'd written it, I thought I'd share. As you say, it has no other use than unpicking a stupid "install", done by a butterbrain like myself :-) > But then, I do not care at all about that target being in the Makefile or > not. I'll just ignore it, just as almost everybody else. Until I needed it; I didn't care that it wasn't there. Even then "need" is perhaps too strong a word. It was handy. That's it. If there are strong moral objections to it; it doesn't bother me. Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE ```