[cfe-dev] Clang 3.5 Release Pre-Pre-Pre-Announcement

[Hans Wennborg]

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote:
>
> In article <CANt7B+e3tiGm_A3FVgGJeKZP4FK_XvVeO0Lwvvs_TrNmZ0PouQ at mail.gmail.com>,
>     =?UTF-8?B?S2ltIEdyw6RzbWFu?= <kim.grasman at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:46 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The more we discuss this, the more I'm leaning in the direction of a
>> >> different SDK package containing library variant(s) and headers,
>> >> leaving the "product" package containing all the binaries but no
>> >> headers or librarys or language bindings (i.e. no libclang, python,
>> >> etc.).
>> >
>> > That is my preference as well.
>>
>> Same here.
>>
>> The only possible drawback is that to maintain a Unix-like filesystem
>> layout (today %PROGRAMFILES%\LLVM\ is the equivalent of /usr/), the
>> different installers will have to put their respective files in the
>> same root. I'm not sure if that's a problem for NSIS to have two
>> packages installed into the same directory, but I figure it might be.
>
> This should only be a problem if NSIS assumes that there is a
> one-to-one mapping between installed products and installation
> directories.  I know for Windows Installer (MSI) this is not a problem
> because the installer has an explicit manifest of all installed files,
> but if NSIS's uninstall logic is just "remove everything at the
> installation root", then this would be a problem.

I think NSIS keeps track of the individually installed files too, so
using the same dir could work, but I think it would be hard to avoid
having the packages trip over each other. If we have two different
packages, it seems completely natural to have two different default
install dirs.

 - Hans