Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 19:43:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: new install(1) utility Message-ID: <199504050243.TAA09413@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <9504050024.AA23499@cs.weber.edu> from "Terry Lambert" at Apr 4, 95 06:24:16 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Serves you right for using the install utility to do the install > > > instead of using "cp -p". > > > > Ahh, and the overhead of calling chown, chgrp, and chmod is much better? > > 'I don't think so'. > > Since "cp -p" preserves this information, you are saying that the > copy in the source tree has the incorrect owner, group, and permissions. That is exactly what he is saying, the copy in the object tree has the owner, group and permissions of what ever process created it and what umask was in effect at the time. > This is something which should be corrected in the source tree. Doing > the correction post-facto elsewhere is bogus. Either way, your going to end up execing chown (it can do the chgrp) and chmod. Your basically arguing that there should not be an install binary at all, and that we should be gluing all sorts of stuff around cp to make it do the job. I don't totally agree, but then I don't totally disagree. This is a place that comprimises have to be made, and it seems to me that adding a -t option to install to have it preserve the source files timestamp on the target is a reasonable one. It sure is a lot less work than trying to replace install with cp -p. I am not so sure about having it do things like gzip, strip, symbolic links and all that other gunk though. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Custom computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504050243.TAA09413>