[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: must install-sh be executable?

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: must install-sh be executable?
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 17:15:58 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-09-01)

Hello Bruno,

* Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 04:59:59PM CEST:
> In automake-1.9b, the @install_sh@ variable was changed to start with
> '$(SHELL) '.

Yes.  This issue has been discussed before, but is not resolved yet.

> Here is a fix that ensures that INSTALL and MKDIR_P are always starting with
> $(SHELL) when they refer to a shell script in the package.

The downside is that now @MKDIR_P@ is unusable in shell scripts, which
has previously not been the case.  And AFAIK Autoconf doesn't explicitly
forbid this usage (I asked whether we could support this, at the time
AC_PROG_MKDIR_P was invented; so if this is changed now, it needs a NEWS
item and a doc update).

I wouldn't be surprised if prefixing INSTALL* with \$(SHELL) breaks
some existing configure.ac scripts/setups.  Not all the world is a
makefile, and not all build tools are called `make'.

Probably Alexandre's suggestion to decouple AC_PROG_MKDIR_P and
AM_PROG_MKDIR_P seems the most useful to me.  Not sure though.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]