Re: Excluding Dynamically Linked Libraries

Hi, On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 19:33:22 +0100, Chuck Wolber wrote: ... > http://www.chuckwolber.com/rpm-patches.tar.gz there were some "lethal" issues like cat(1) instead of echo(1). # The objective is to be able to run the following and get no output: # /usr/bin/ldd ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/rpm-4.3.3/.libs/rp

[patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files

is unreachable for several days. This CVS pserver address comes from: http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/ Regards, Lace -- Jan Kratochvil; Captive: free r/w NTFS Filesystem; http://www.jankratochvil.net/ diff -u -ru autoconf-2.57-orig/lib/autoconf/status.m4 autoconf-2.57/lib/autoconf/status.m4 -

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files

gnize the -x option, Just a try - this is also forbidden?: if ls -ld $f | grep -q '^...x'; then Regards, Lace -- Jan Kratochvil; Captive: free r/w NTFS Filesystem; http://www.jankratochvil.net/ diff -u -ru autoconf-2.57-orig/lib/autoconf/status.m4 autoconf-2.57/lib/autoconf/status

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files

Hi, On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:55:04 +0100, Eric Sunshine wrote: ... > At the very least, it would be a good idea to > only use "ls -ld" after checking that such usage is valid (i.e. ensure > that "ls -ld" actually works, and works as intended on the target platform). As the possible 'keep executa

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files

Hi, On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:27:49 +0100, Eric Sunshine wrote: > Jan Kratochvil wrote: ... > > As the possible 'keep executable' feature would be dependent upon by the > > package there is no way to make it optional according to the host platform. > > What I mea

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files

Hi, On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:14:00 +0100, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Akim Demaille wrote: ... > > chmod +w :) > > Which will fail if the current user does not have the right to update > the file (e.g. owned by another user ID). This may seem unusual, but > it can be expected for

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files v3

Hi, I rewrote those several lines of code - does it look OK now? It appears to execute fine. Regards, Lace diff -u -ru autoconf-2.57-orig/lib/autoconf/status.m4 autoconf-2.57/lib/autoconf/status.m4 --- autoconf-2.57-orig/lib/autoconf/status.m4 Tue Nov 12 11:54:46 2002 +++ autoconf-2.57/lib/a

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files v4

Hi, On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:50:02 +0100, Eric Sunshine wrote: ... > composite output file. Of course, that fails with this above scheme since > the net result is that it clones only the execute permission of the very last > file in the ac_file_inputs list. It would probably make more sense to

Re: [patch] Keep executability of config.status-ed files v4

Hi, On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:25:59 +0100, Paul Jarc wrote: > Jan Kratochvil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +for f in $ac_file_inputs; do > > + cp $f $ac_file > > + chmod u+w $ac_file > > + break > > +done > > Rather than use the

LIST-ADMIN: List-Id of autoconf-patches

Hi, I failed to find out who is the list admin, sorry: Please fix your header List-Id: Patches for autoconf, the GNU build system to comply with RFC2919 and RFC822/RFC2822. You use a forbidden special ','. Either quote it List-Id: "Patches for autoconf, the GNU build system"