On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 08:53:58AM +0100, Tim Van Holder wrote: > On Thu, 2002-02-14 at 00:46, Paul Eggert wrote: > > > From: John Poltorak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:21:20 +0000 > > > > > > What is the recommended way of treating a DOS path such as? :- > > > > > > c:\def\ghij;k:\lm; > > > > > > > > > Should some attempt be made to convert '\' to '/' before running autoconf > > > or configure, > > > > That's what I'd do, yes. > > > > In fact, I'd go further and insist on a PATH that conforms to POSIX, > > and uses ":" as a separator.
':' can't be used as a path seperator because it is used to designate drive letters. > > My understanding is that the better DOS > > development environments support that. (Use one of those. :-) Are any of these 'better DOS development environments' available for OS/2? > I wouldn't go that far; autoconf currently supports ';' as pathsep > just fine. And in "most" places, I think it also handles a \ as dirsep. > > However, there will probably be places where a path is (accidentally) > echoed or passed unquoted (e.g. subdir configuration is one of those, > IIRC), causing the backslashes to be expanded as escaped characters. I have just discovered that KSH interprets '\b' as a backspace, so when attempting to convert c:\usr\bin, the result comes out as c:/usin. I'm trying to work out the best way of dealing with this. > So while it _shouldn't_ be a problem (and any such problems should still > be posted here; if we can trivially support this, I believe we should), > I would indeed recommend flipping PATH slashes for autoconf (e.g. in > config.site). I didn't think autoconf itself used config.site... -- John
