paul@ixi.uucp (Paul Davey) (11/10/90)
In article <1990Nov8.014515.13882@cpsc.ucalgary.ca> paquette@cs-sun-fsa.cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Trevor Paquette) writes:
-> Quick and I hope a fairly simple question. We have some programs
-> that must be able to take advantage of two co-processors on a sun.
-> The executables are name prog_host (no coprocessor), prog_sc (Supercard
-> coprocessor) and prog_qc (Quickcard coprocessor).
-> Each executable is in a seperate directory. I want to be able to change
-> my path on the fly to get at a certain executable. This is what I have
-> done so far.
-> Let's say my path is set as :
-> (. /usr/ucb /bin /usr/bin /usr/local/bin /home/insight/sparc/bin/itahost)
...
lots of mucking around with sed deleted...
As an alternative solution I'd use a symbolic link to the bin and
delete it and recreate it as required.
if your three bins are: /home/insight/sparc/bin/itahost
/home/insight/sparc/bin/itaqc
/home/insight/sparc/bin/itasc
set path = (. /usr/ucb /bin /usr/bin /usr/local/bin ~/itabin)
alias host 'rm -f ~/itabin ; ln -s /home/insight/sparc/bin/itahost'
alias qc 'rm -f ~/itabin ; ln -s /home/insight/sparc/bin/itaqc'
alias sc 'rm -f ~/itabin ; ln -s /home/insight/sparc/bin/itasc'
(you don't need to rehash, at least not on my machine)
--
Regards, pd@x.co.uk IXI Limited
Paul Davey pd@ixi.uucp 62-74 Burleigh St.
...!uunet!ixi!pd Cambridge U.K.
"These are interesting times" +44 223 462 131 CB1 1OJ goer@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz) (11/12/90)
In <PAUL.90Nov10154152@cheshire.ixi.uucp> paul@ixi.uucp (Paul Davey) writes: >As an alternative solution I'd use a symbolic link to the bin and >delete it and recreate it as required. Ln -s isn't portable, as I'm sure you know. Hmmm. -Richard
greywolf@unisoft.UUCP (The Grey Wolf) (11/15/90)
In article <1990Nov11.193202.6051@midway.uchicago.edu> goer@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz) writes: >In <PAUL.90Nov10154152@cheshire.ixi.uucp> paul@ixi.uucp (Paul Davey) writes: > >>As an alternative solution I'd use a symbolic link to the bin and >>delete it and recreate it as required. > >Ln -s isn't portable, as I'm sure you know. Hmmm. > >-Richard Symlinks *not PORTABLE*???? on a SUN? You must be kidding. Even SVR4 supports symlinks these days. -- "This is *not* going to work!" "Well, why didn't you say so before?" "I *did* say so before!" ...!{ucbvax,acad,uunet,amdahl,pyramid}!unisoft!greywolf
guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) (11/18/90)
>Symlinks *not PORTABLE*???? No, symlinks *aren't* portable, at least not to all UNIX systems widely used today. >on a SUN? Yes, they are supported on all flavors of SunOS (dunno about the original Unisoft V7 for the Sun, but only people trying to be perverse would call that SunOS), so the person who originally asked the question could use them assuming they'd use them only on the Suns to which they referred or on other systems whose OS supported them. >You must be kidding. Even SVR4 supports symlinks these days. Sure does, but S5R3 as it comes from AT&T doesn't, and there are lots of systems running S5R3 systems that haven't had symlink support added. In other words, symlinks aren't portable to all UNIX systems widely used today. This may change in the future.