Re: portable tests for symlinks (was patch for autoconf manual)

2002-04-09 Thread Eric Siegerman
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 12:45:52PM +1000, Martin Pool wrote: > for cmd in test /bin/test /usr/bin/test /usr/ucb/bin/test /usr/ucb/test Minor quibble: This should probably try the built-in "test" last; an external binary is preferable (though slower), since it will work the same regardless of

Re: portable tests for symlinks (was patch for autoconf manual)

2002-04-08 Thread Martin Pool
On 14 Mar 2002, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would you contribute the text itself? TIA! Yes, I'd be happy to help. I can't promise that the solution outlined below works everywhere, but it has been tested on a number of unix-like platforms and seems to be OK. I suppose at least m

Re: patch for autoconf manual

2002-03-14 Thread Martin Pool
On 14 Mar 2002, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would you contribute the text itself? TIA! OK, when I work out something that works on all our machines I'll send you a note. I can't promise it will work everywhere. -- Martin

Re: patch for autoconf manual

2002-03-14 Thread Akim Demaille
Would you contribute the text itself? TIA!

Re: patch for autoconf manual

2002-03-14 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Martin Pool writes: > I am not sure what a good portable way to test for symlinks from the > shell would be. In libtool we've used if (test -h $file) >/dev/null 2>&1 || (test -L $file) >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then echo "$file is a symlink" fi (Actually, it's part of a larger scheme to replace 't

patch for autoconf manual

2002-03-13 Thread Martin Pool
In the "Limitations of Usual Tools" page you might like to add a note that the -h and -L options to "test" specified by the current POSIX and SUS specifications and implemented in GNU are not portable. In fact, on Solaris 8 they fail in a rather bizarre and confusing way: $ ln -s /nowhere bad $