On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 02:16:09PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 12:42:50PM -0400, Igor Pechtchanski wrote: >> The only thing I didn't test were the rules in the Makefile, >> so if someone could please double-check them, it'd be great. > >> Index: winsup/utils/Makefile.in >> =================================================================== >> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/winsup/utils/Makefile.in,v >> retrieving revision 1.53 >> diff -u -p -r1.53 Makefile.in >> --- winsup/utils/Makefile.in 12 Sep 2003 01:51:21 -0000 1.53 >> +++ winsup/utils/Makefile.in 27 Sep 2003 16:24:54 -0000 >> @@ -84,12 +84,17 @@ PROGS:=warn_dumper $(PROGS) >> CLEAN_PROGS+=dumper.exe >> endif >> >> +PROGS+=cygprogctl >> + >> .SUFFIXES: >> .NOEXPORT: >> >> .PHONY: all install clean realclean warn_dumper >> >> all: Makefile $(PROGS) >> + >> +cygprogctl: $(srcdir)/cygprogctl >> + cp -p $< $@ >> >> strace.exe: strace.o path.o $(MINGW_DEP_LDLIBS) >> ifdef VERBOSE > >Wouldn't it be sufficient to add $(srcdir)/cygprogctl to PROGS and to >drop the copy rule? The script only needs installing and that should >work then.
That sounds right to me. I'm still not wild about the name but nothing better comes to mind (other than cygoption). Before I say "ok, check this in" does anyone have a brilliant idea for a name for this script? cgf
