Matthew Burgess wrote:
Essentially, if one uses the current '--prefix=""' then the following
ends up in the logs:
Rusty Russell says: 'Hmm. "" is not a valid path, in general. Hard to
see this as a bug, I'm afraid.'
Both the current `./configure --prefix="" --mandir=/usr/share/man` and
t
M.Canales.es wrote:
El Lunes, 21 de Noviembre de 2005 22:22, Matthew Burgess escribió:
3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
Try this:
if [ x$(prefix) = x/ ]
That is recommended way to test varaibles when you aren't sure that
Jeremy Byron wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
This should still give the 'unary operator expected' message, I would
think.
Nope, for once I did actually test this before proposing it :-)
In
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Hi folks,
There's a minor issue with the Makefile in this version.
Essentially, if one uses the current '--prefix=""' then the following
ends up in the logs:
/bin/sh: line 0: [: =: unary operator expected
That's caused by:
Makefile:71: if [ $(prefix) = / ]
In this c
El Lunes, 21 de Noviembre de 2005 22:22, Matthew Burgess escribió:
> 3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
>
> if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
Try this:
if [ x$(prefix) = x/ ]
That is recommended way to test varaibles when you aren't sure that it allways
have an
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:22:27PM +, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> I've a preference for option 3) in the long-term but put 2) in the book
> for the time being until the patch for 2 is submitted, accepted and in
> an upstream release.
Since option 3, or some other fix decided upon by upstream
Hi folks,
There's a minor issue with the Makefile in this version.
Essentially, if one uses the current '--prefix=""' then the following
ends up in the logs:
/bin/sh: line 0: [: =: unary operator expected
That's caused by:
Makefile:71: if [ $(prefix) = / ]
In this case, $(prefix) will obvi
