What about PATH issues and '.'? It may not be a problem, but the
thought leapt into my mind...
H
--
> Following these lines, it's nonsense to maintain some
> half-support for non-executable install-sh. If we don't want to
> support this use-case, ${SHELL} should be fully removed from
> every cal
Hello Ralf!
On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 09:33:20AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> I say we drop the test and require that install-sh be executable.
> After all, this is so much easier to do.
>
> OK to apply?
Sounds good (I didn't understand the advantage of non-executable install-sh)
- though you h
Hello Alexandre,
* Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote on Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 01:44:34PM CEST:
> >>> "RW" == Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> RW> Maybe there is a solution to all cases. But until then, I don't think
> RW> it's a good idea to advertise half-solutions, and employ half-tests
>>> "RW" == Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
RW> Maybe there is a solution to all cases. But until then, I don't think
RW> it's a good idea to advertise half-solutions, and employ half-tests.
RW> And yes, that is very much IMHO.
Following these lines, it's nonsense to mainta
Hello Peter,
* Peter O'Gorman wrote on Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 01:08:53AM CEST:
> >>On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 09:33:20AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >>>I say we drop the test and require that install-sh be executable.
> >>>After all, this is so much easier to do.
> On a regular basis, I patch pack
On Sep 6, 2006, at 3:58 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
[ http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2006-09/msg1.html ]
Hello Patrick,
* Patrick Welche wrote on Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 01:30:26PM CEST:
On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 09:33:20AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
I say we drop the test and
[ http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2006-09/msg1.html ]
Hello Patrick,
* Patrick Welche wrote on Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 01:30:26PM CEST:
> On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 09:33:20AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > I say we drop the test and require that install-sh be executable.
> > After al
Hello Patrick,
* Patrick Welche wrote on Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 01:52:10PM CEST:
> In nobase.test:
>
> # Remove the 'x' bits just for fun. (Peter O'Gorman said: "If an
> # upstream source tarball does not use the autotools, it is sometimes
> # easier to build if it is modified to use them. Then a
