[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: autoconf and OS/2

From: Andreas Buening
Subject: Re: autoconf and OS/2
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 23:29:25 +0200

Akim Demaille wrote:
> | $diff /temp/autoconf-2.50/acgeneral.m4 acgeneral.m4
> | 4386c4386,4387
> | <     AC_MSG_ERROR([cannot link $ac_dest to $srcdir/$ac_source])
> | ---
> | >       (cp -p $srcdir/$ac_source $ac_dest &&
> | >         AC_MSG_WARN([cannot link $ac_dest to $srcdir/$ac_source, using cp 
> -p instead]))
> Hm, this, I really don't know :(
> Some context for the other people:  when using AC_CONFIG_LINKS,
> config.status is equipped with code to build the links:
>   # Make a symlink if possible; otherwise try a hard link.
>   ln -s $ac_rel_source $ac_dest 2>/dev/null ||
>     ln $srcdir/$ac_source $ac_dest ||
>     AC_MSG_ERROR([cannot link $ac_dest to $srcdir/$ac_source])
> Now, the question is why we never used `cp -p' here.  Well, I guess
> one reason is that Makefiles don't have rules to update this
> dependency?  So if we actually have a copy, then the updating would
> work?

I don't think so. But an updated file requires a programmer who updated
that file. ;-)
For the "normal" user it makes no difference whether it is a copy or a
and the programmer should have (hopefully) read the warning about "cp



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]