On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:16:16AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I would still like to see {auto{conf,make},libtool} use Ralf
> > Engelschall's shtool (or a variant of it) to encapsulate the
> > portability issues of things lik
--- Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Earnie" == Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Let it be for speed issues, I'm in favor of /tmp via TMPDIR. This
>
> Earnie> You missed the point; /tmp isn't portable, it doesn't always
> Earnie> exist (E.G.: MSDOS or WINDOWS). A
> "Earnie" == Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Let it be for speed issues, I'm in favor of /tmp via TMPDIR. This
Earnie> You missed the point; /tmp isn't portable, it doesn't always
Earnie> exist (E.G.: MSDOS or WINDOWS). At least with TMPDIR I can
Earnie> set it to be whatever I
On Mar 15, 2000, Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why use /tmp at all?
Because those commands are run at install time, when the
program/library has to be relinked for installation. In this case, we
can't assume the current directory, i.e., the build tree, is writable.
> Since autoconf
--- Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Earnie" == Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Earnie> --- Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -8<-
> >> As for mkdir -m, it seems to me that
> >>
> >> (umask 700 && mkdir /tmp/foo)
>
> Grmph, 077.
>
> >>
> >> is just fine.
>
> "Earnie" == Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Earnie> --- Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -8<-
>> As for mkdir -m, it seems to me that
>>
>> (umask 700 && mkdir /tmp/foo)
Grmph, 077.
>>
>> is just fine.
>>
Earnie> -8<-
Earnie> Why use /tmp at all? Since autoconf is fo
--- Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-8<-
>
> As for mkdir -m, it seems to me that
>
> (umask 700 && mkdir /tmp/foo)
>
> is just fine.
>
-8<-
Why use /tmp at all? Since autoconf is for portibility you can't really assume
that /tmp exists. Why not simply create a temporary directory
| On Mar 13, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > I would still like to see {auto{conf,make},libtool} use Ralf
| > Engelschall's shtool (or a variant of it) to encapsulate the
| > portability issues of things like mkdir -p and mkdir -m 700 into a
| > single script rather than sc
On Mar 13, 2000, "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would still like to see {auto{conf,make},libtool} use Ralf
> Engelschall's shtool (or a variant of it) to encapsulate the
> portability issues of things like mkdir -p and mkdir -m 700 into a
> single script rather than scattered ac
