From:	"Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To:	<djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject:	RE: Ribust shell-based test for DJGPP?
Date:	Fri, 29 Dec 2000 21:02:27 +0100
Message-ID:	<NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHEECFCAAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To:	<3A4CE287.E4B0DAED@softhome.net>
Importance:	Normal
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id OAA04351
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Hmm. I think even following could be used:
> if test -d /dev/c; then
>   # Here we are...
> fi
No, I don't think that's safe. Linux users may have set it up as a mountpoint for
their DOS C: partition, or as a symlink to the relevant mount point or device.
Not THAT likely, but IMO more likely than the test for DJDIR and DJGPP causing
false positives.

> But it won't work on systems without C: drive, of course.
And there's that as well. Though such systems probably would not be running
DJGPP.

> > Since config.guess uses it, I suppose I could indeed also use 'uname', testing for
> > 'pc' as machine and 'MS-DOS' as OS. 
> 
> But it introduces sometimes redudant dependency on shellutils. Simple configures
> can do without it - now they will not be able.
True; this was my original reason for not using it (as I stated when DJ suggested it).

- Raw text -