[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Running ./config.status

From: Ralf Corsepius
Subject: Re: Running ./config.status
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 14:49:29 +0100

On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 05:10 -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 08:53:51AM +0100, Stepan Kasal wrote:
> > -       cd $(top_builddir) && ./config.status $(subdir)/$@
> > +       cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@
> > The question: Why does Automake add "$(SHELL)" to the command?
> If you believe `man perlrun', some systems do not respect #! and start all
> scripts under csh.

I assume, the systems they refer to, actually are victim to the length
limitations some systems impose on "!# " lines.

Unlike shells, which typically are found "short dirs"
like /bin, /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin etc., perl installation tend to be
installed to "obscure directories" like 
and therefore perl scripts are much likely to suffer from the

So I'd guess, perlrun is drawing incorrect conclusions.

>   $(SHELL) ./script defends against that.
Theoretically, the "#!" limitations also could hit autoconf scripts,
esp. if autoconf is heading towards choosing "suitable shells on $PATH"
instead of using standard shells. 
So adding $(SHELL) might not be wrong.


reply via email to

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