Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3AA3F8D7.30E78753@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 20:36:39 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.17 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: DJGPP workers <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Fileutils 4.0 port and ginstall
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010305091244 DOT 23825A-100000 AT is>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello!

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 4 Mar 2001, Richard Dawe wrote:
> > One thing that worries me: should foo be created at the destination as
> > well as foo.exe? That way we do what ginstall has been asked to do, as
> > well as creating an executable that can be run by command.com, etc.
> 
> Please give specific examples of situations where this would be
> useful.  What ginstall was asked to do was to install a file so that
> it can be run from the command line without using its absolute path.
> How is this done is totally up to us.  I've never seen any install
> target in a Makefile which actually tests whether a file is created in
> the target directory.

   ginstall src dest

is only asking to copy 'src' to 'dest'. We're making it do something sane
for executable files. My concern is that we're not doing _exactly_ what it
asks.

But if you've never seen anything that does check that 'src' has been
copied to 'dest', then it's probably OK. I admit it does seem like a
stange thing to do - you'd expect ginstall to return an error code if it
failed.

Maybe I worry too much sometimes. 8)

Thanks, bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com> http://www.bigfoot.com/~richdawe/ 

"The soul is the mirror of an indestructible universe."
--- Gottfried W. Leibniz