> Or did you mean "not to overwrite existing stuff"? If you didn't > then we both agree, and this whole discussion was pointless.
No, I said overwrite selectively. No you didn't. You said: ,---- | If you want to use make install for _overwriting_existing_stuff_ | selectively, you should expect to have to use some configure or make | tweak to get that to happen. `---- Part which I was refering to is emphasised. You want it to overwrite some executables and not others, just because these two are implemented as scripts you don't use the vanilla implementations of them. If you want selectivity in which of the executables to install, that has to be a nondefault option. I don't consider /libexec/rc a executable, I consider it a configuration file (that just happens to have a couple bits fliped to make it executable). For /libexec/runsystem I'm quite OK to classify it as either a executable or a configuration file; since I really don't care to much about /libexec/runsystem. But there are perfectly valid reasons to edit /libexec/rc, and as such it should be classifed as a configuration file. If so, it should get the same treatment as /etc/motd and friends get right now. Cheers. _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
