>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Peter> Akim Demaille writes:
>> I agree that `mkdir -p' belong to the spirit of `missing', but I
>> certainly have no problems with `mkinstalldirs',

Peter> How does that fit together? Would `missing mkdir -p' invoke
Peter> `mkinstalldirs'? That would be fine with me, because then
Peter> `mkinstalldirs' is useful in it's own right for whoever wants
Peter> it.

What I meant is that I would agree with `mkdir -p' moving from a stand
alone shell script into `missing', that's homogenous and much in the
spirit of `missing'.

But I have no problem either with a separate shell script.

By the way, why do you say it is useful in its own right?


Peter> Btw., what's that `shtool' you keep talking about?

Basically it's an `automissing'.

        http://www.gnu.org/software/shtool/shtool.html

The Good Thing of shtool is that it offers a sane environment to the
developers: individual understandable shell scripts, and when in
release mode, it packs them all together into a single shtool.

Akim

Reply via email to