I haven't seen any response to this report yet.
Is there a good reason the "empty" file can't be done using:
rm -f empty touch empty(just to be thorough)
or
cp /dev/null empty
or
cat /dev/null empty
or ???
Harlan
"Harlan" == Harlan Stenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Harlan I haven't seen any response to this report yet. Is there a
Harlan good reason the "empty" file can't be done using:
Harlan rm -f empty touch empty (just to be thorough)
Up to now we avoided touch.
Harlan or
Harlan cp /dev/null
Harlan Stenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I haven't seen any response to this report yet.
I'm beginning to think that Ultrix's /bin/sh is so bad that polluting,
er... changing autoconf to accommodate is may not be worthwhile.
Do any of you have an idea of how big the Ultrix-using community is?
|
"Jim" == Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim I vaguely recall that we couldn't depend on touch. However, it
Jim *is* in the list of programs mentioned in standards.info's
Jim `Utilities in Makefiles' section.
Anyway, we really need to know how to create portably empty files, we
use it
Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| "Jim" == Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| Jim I vaguely recall that we couldn't depend on touch. However, it
| Jim *is* in the list of programs mentioned in standards.info's
| Jim `Utilities in Makefiles' section.
|
| Anyway, we really need to
"Jim" == Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim | Jim Not everyone has a /dev/null.
Jim |
Jim | Huh??? What for instance?
Jim Er... Well, I guess you've caught me :-) I can't name one
Jim offhand. And even if I could, it probably wouldn't be worth
Jim making a change.
Well I have an
"Paul" == Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Paul Sorry, I lost context. Why can't we ask people to invoke
Paul 'CONFIG_SHELL=/bin/sh5 /bin/sh5 configure' on Ultrix? If
Paul there's only a few dozen users, we can just inform them of this
Paul by hand.
I was considering the option of
"Robert" == Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert Well CFLAGS was the autoconf maintainers suggestion.
Yes, my opinion was to have a macro which defines WIN32_FLAGS, and let
the user do what they want with it: glue it to CFLAGS, AC_SUBST it etc.
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Robert Collins" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 10:37 PM
Subject: Re: updated win32 macro
"Robert" == Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Robert Well CFLAGS
"Robert" == Robert Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Robert Wasn't that for the low level interface? Which I've done - it
Robert defines WIN32FLAGS...
This is fine! Most people will not want to bother, and having it into
CFLAGS is fine, there is nothing else to do. And your low level one
Hi People,
I am going to release 2.49d within an hour I think. It is time to
target 2.50 for real. Let it live one or two weeks, and let it be
2.50.
From now on, only fixes for *new* bugs will be applied (i.e., what was
broken in 2.13 and is still broken today, won't be fixed in 2.50).
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:23:10AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
"Jim" == Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Jim I vaguely recall that we couldn't depend on touch. However, it
Jim *is* in the list of programs mentioned in standards.info's
Jim `Utilities in Makefiles' section.
Anyway,
"Nicolas" == Nicolas Joly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nicolas Ok, but the `diff -u' test is broken (see below).
Thanks Nicolas!
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.utils.bug as well.
The Autoconf team is extremely proud (and quite relieved) to announce
the birth of Autoconf 2.49d, our release candidate. The core Autoconf
is not expected to change before the release, while
| Jim Not everyone has a /dev/null.
|
| Huh??? What for instance?
Er... Well, I guess you've caught me :-)
I can't name one offhand. And even if I could, it probably
wouldn't be worth making a change.
DJGPP doesn't (didn't) have one; its bash does support it, so the
current redirecting
There is something which is extremely important, and I think Lars can
help us on this issue: compatibility with Libtool. I'm almost sure
1.3.5 and before did things that drive 2.50 crazy. AFAIR, the very
next Libtool does not have this problem.
Is it right?
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 11:23:10AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
Anyway, we really need to know how to create portably empty files, we
use it at other places IIRC.
echo a | grep b empty-file
Yucky, but it works :-)
I was going to suggest
echo "" | grep . empty-file
but if grep ever
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:01:32PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.utils.bug as well.
The Autoconf team is extremely proud (and quite relieved) to announce
the birth of Autoconf 2.49d, our release candidate.
On Mon, Mar 19, 2001 at 05:01:32PM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
that has been posted to gnu.utils.bug as well.
The Autoconf team is extremely proud (and quite relieved) to announce
the birth of Autoconf 2.49d, our release candidate.
On Monday 19 March 2001 6:36 pm, Akim Demaille wrote:
There is something which is extremely important, and I think Lars can
help us on this issue: compatibility with Libtool. I'm almost sure
1.3.5 and before did things that drive 2.50 crazy. AFAIR, the very
next Libtool does not have this
I got much farther with /bin/sh5:
...
configure: creating ./config.status
sed: Unexpected End-of-file
/bin/sh5: ^Jsrcdir=..^JINSTALL=/usr/bin/install: not found
configure: WARNING: you should use --build, --host, --target
configure: WARNING: invalid host type: --enable-parse-clocks
I missed something along the way and could not find it in the mail
archive. Could someone recap why the following is not a good way to
create empty files? It should be a defined behavior for all POSIX
shells. I understand that the subject line implies that this does not
work under Ultrix. I
On Mar 19, 2001, Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, we really need to know how to create portably empty files, we
use it at other places IIRC.
Do we? IIRC, there are filesystems that don't support zero-sized
files. So we shouldn't depend on it, and we shouldn't depend on being
23 matches
Mail list logo
