On 2013-11-18 21:28, David Holmes wrote:
MOre generally this seems solvable simply by changing the existing
error message to "an executable binary file for XXXX could not be
found" - and the user could see if it was missing or just not marked
executable. :)
I agree with David.
The solution seems excessively complex for a simple issue.
We are indeed already testing for the executable permission, so we check
the right thing. The error message does not match what we test, however.
Simply changing
AC_MSG_ERROR([Could not find $2 in the Boot JDK])
into
AC_MSG_ERROR([The file $2 in the Boot JDK is missing or not executable])
will match the test we actually do (test -x), and will provide the user
with enough information to continue solving the problem.
I have a hard time believing it is a common problem that a JDK
installation exists, where the executable permission is missing. So it's
reasonable to have this as a last time check, and not as part of the
already complext BOOTJDK_DO_CHECK logic.
/Magnus
