Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 15:02:18 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org> To: clefevre@noos.fr Cc: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: patch for bsd.lib.mk to create include and lib dirs Message-ID: <200101242202.f0OM2I961735@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "24 Jan 2001 19:21:01 %2B0100." <zoggyfoy.fsf@gits.dyndns.org> References: <zoggyfoy.fsf@gits.dyndns.org> <20010124113902.B332@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <zoggyfoy.fsf@gits.dyndns.org> 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200101242202.f0OM2I961735>