Re: [PATCH 1/2] Avoid another use of `chmod -R'.

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:17:21PM CEST:
> At Wednesday 31 March 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Stefano Lattarini wrote
> > > Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure I understand.  We are not putting any symlinks
> > > > into $(distdir), why would this be needed?
> > [CUT]
> > > to cater for the (admittedly very unlikely) case that a
> > > dist-hook will be added that puts a symlink in $(distdir), or
> > > that a bug will be introduced that ends up putting a symlink in
> > > $(distdir) somehow.
> > 
> > I wouldn't want to hide a bug preemptively, if that means it won't
> >  show up here but only with user packages.
> That's a good objection, but the problem with this "theoretical" bug 
> is that it could manifest *silently*, and go unnoticed for a long 
> time.  The better option is to extend the testsuite to preemptively 
> look for the possible bug.  Once that's done, we can leave alone the 
> "chmod -R" (even If I'd like a comment saying "chmod -R is safe here 
> because $(distdir) doesn't contain symlinks", but that's just 
> nitpicking).

OK ok, I'll take the patch.

Thanks,
Ralf