Date: Tue, 4 Apr 95 17:06:07 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com (Rodney W. Grimes) Cc: nate@trout.sri.MT.net, kargl@troutmask.apl.washington.edu, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: new install(1) utility Message-ID: <9504042306.AA21122@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199504042152.OAA08510@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> from "Rodney W. Grimes" at Apr 4, 95 02:52:56 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You happened to have picked a bad example. There are include files
> that this holds true for, and that is due not really having good
> support in the *.mk files for a includes: rule. I would rather
> see the above type of thing folded into the .mk files and not
> muck with the install binary.
Exactly; it's an issue of not doing the wrong thing because you
have a dependency which stops you before you screw up.
> > It has nothing to do with make-like dependency capabilities. With the
> > addition of that option, install now determines if it really needs to
> > install the files rather than blindly doing it no matter what.
>
> I think Terry means this:
>
> ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}${PROG}: ${.OBJDIR}/${PROG}
> install ${COPY} ${STRIP} -m ${BINMODE} -o ${BINOWN} -g ${GINGRP} \
> ${PROG} ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}
>
> install: ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}${PROG}
Much cleaner than what I was thinking! Thank you!
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9504042306.AA21122>