Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Apr 95 20:00:00 MDT
From:      terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert)
To:        nate@sneezy.sri.com
Cc:        nate@trout.sri.MT.net, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com
Subject:   Re: new install(1) utility
Message-ID:  <9504050200.AA25538@cs.weber.edu>
In-Reply-To: <199504050122.TAA08559@trout.sri.MT.net> from "Nate Williams" at Apr 4, 95 07:22:59 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
You convinced me (at least for "install -p" for preserve time stamps
but set uid/gid/modes) with your post prior to this one.  I think we
have ended up with interleaved threads here, which makes things a bit
more difficult to unravel.

> > You could argue that it was then a mistake to rebuild the binary,
> > since the generated binary that already exists is newer than the
> > source files from which it is derived... 
> 
> True, but sometimes header files have changes in them which don't affect
> certain binaries, but for safety sake we still must rebuild the binary
> because the system has no way of knowing that.  Since the binaries
> aren't any different, we shouldn't install the binary even though it has
> a newer date.

Julian put forth a persuasive argument to this effect just recently,
and I agree, in theory.  My problem is that this is going to change the
iden strings in the binary in any case, and the compare will *always*
show differences.

I don't see a reasonable way around this.

> This would clean up the Makefiles which are
> hacked to work around a what I consider a deficiency in install, and
> allow us to easily add this functionality to other Makefiles like the
> libraries versions.

I bought off on "-p"; I think that the .mk files could fix a lot of your
other arguments, as Rod suggested.

> Hmm, I'm getting the feeling that Terry thinks 'cp -p' will solve all of
> the world's problems.  It won't.  See other email.

I agree now.  See other email.  8-).


> Reality check Terry.  We are talking about the tools we have today, not
> tomorrow.  We're not going to modify every build tool in existance so
> your perfect dependency world can be satisfied.

Oh, cmon, ...please!  Can't I have a little bit of peril?  8-).


					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?9504050200.AA25538>