bobf@BLUMIRIS.CHEM.UMR.EDU ("Robert B. Funchess") (03/03/90)
A recent posting mentions that cc -s works but doesn't seem to be documented. We are running 3.1 rev D -- this may be fixed in 3.2 but I don't know -- in which the man page for install says that -c means "put the file here, iff it doesn't already exist". HOWEVER.... if I try to do this, install gives me its built in "dummy, this is the proper syntax" line, which DOESN'T mention a -c flag. Incidentally, the Irix install seems to be -- "enhanced" -- to the point of incompatibility with a lot of Makefiles. Then again, the Irix make seems to be "enhanced" to the point of incompatibility with a lot of Makefiles. Back to the point: there is an error in either the manual or the install command. Since I am trying to build TeX, there are one h*** of a lot of Makefiles to wade thru and change every instance of "install" to be Irix- compatible. Is it possible, in the next major release of Irix, be it 3.3 or 42 or sqrt(10), to include an "install" that works as promised? Or at least change the documentation? -- < Bob | bobf | Funchess > Stay alert! Trust no one! Keep your laser handy!
brendan@illyria.wpd.sgi.com (Brendan Eich) (03/05/90)
In article <9003022216.AA27699@blumiris.chem.umr.edu>, bobf@BLUMIRIS.CHEM.UMR.EDU ("Robert B. Funchess") writes: > A recent posting mentions that cc -s works but doesn't seem to be documented. cc(1) begins its option documentation by noting "The following options are interpreted by cc. See ld(1) for load-time options." And ld(1) documents the -s option. > We are running 3.1 rev D -- this may be fixed in 3.2 but I don't know -- in > which the man page for install says that -c means "put the file here, iff it > doesn't already exist". HOWEVER.... if I try to do this, install gives me > its built in "dummy, this is the proper syntax" line, which DOESN'T mention > a -c flag. The -c option along with -i and -n were dropped from install in 3.1, but the install(1) man page was not updated. 3.2 includes a man page for /etc/install that reflects reality. > Incidentally, the Irix install seems to be -- "enhanced" -- to the point of > incompatibility with a lot of Makefiles. Then again, the Irix make seems to > be "enhanced" to the point of incompatibility with a lot of Makefiles. Could you name some of the make enhancements that are incompatible? SGI inherited some seldom-used features from MIPS (IPATH, DPATH), and we have added our own often-used features lately. But the features I'm aware of should not create incompatibilities, unless they preempt macro names (as IPATH and DPATH do). > Back to the point: there is an error in either the manual or the install > command. Since I am trying to build TeX, there are one h*** of a lot of > Makefiles to wade thru and change every instance of "install" to be Irix- > compatible. Is it possible that TeX's makefiles are using the BSD install command, which has a -c (copy) option? SGI dropped the SVR3 install -c option because it was confusingly useless. When installing from a makefile, the target file's existence does not mean it's the same as the (usually new) source file being installed. AT&T install -c would tend to install your TeX files at most once in a given tree. That's why I'm wondering whether TeX's makefiles are not in fact invoking BSD install -c. Brendan