From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Jan 24 14: 2:41 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FBB137B401 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 14:02:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f0OM2I961735; Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:02:18 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Message-Id: <200101242202.f0OM2I961735@harmony.village.org> To: clefevre@noos.fr Subject: Re: patch for bsd.lib.mk to create include and lib dirs Cc: Peter Pentchev , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "24 Jan 2001 19:21:01 +0100." References: <20010124113902.B332@ringworld.oblivion.bg> Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:02:18 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message Cyrille Lefevre writes: : would not be better to use install -d instead of mkdir -p which permit, : if needed alsewhere, to also set ownership ? install -d doesn't set the ownership, except on the last component of the path. It was brought into the tree to be compatible with other BSDs, and many objects were raised until I made the promise that it wouldn't be used in "new" code. This happend in 1996: revision 1.16 date: 1996/09/29 06:29:54; author: imp; state: Exp; lines: +56 -5 Implement -d in install. Update the man page to reflect this change. But it looks like install -d has crept into the tree in other places. But why have a define for this? Why not check to make sure that directory is missing before trying to create it? Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message