Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 13:01 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >> So adding $(SHELL) might not be wrong. > > But SHELL might disagree with CONFIG_SHELL; the latter is used to run > config.status. So adding $(SHELL) might be wrong. Possi

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Paul> So these days, I suspect that SHELL != CONFIG_SHELL mismatch is the Paul> greatest problem here. Actually it's rather the converse :) The two variables are equal (configure does SHELL=${CONFIG_SHELL-/bin/sh}), and this has caused some

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Paul Eggert
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> So adding $(SHELL) might not be wrong. But SHELL might disagree with CONFIG_SHELL; the latter is used to run config.status. So adding $(SHELL) might be wrong. Noah Misch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I suspect more systems sti

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Noah Misch wrote on Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 03:32:01PM CET: > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 05:10 -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > > > If you believe `man perlrun', some systems do not respect #! and start all > > > scripts under csh. http://www

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Noah Misch
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 02:49:29PM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 05:10 -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > > If you believe `man perlrun', some systems do not respect #! and start all > > scripts under csh. > > I assume, the systems they refer to, actually are victim to the length >

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On Fri, 2005-02-04 at 05:10 -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 08:53:51AM +0100, Stepan Kasal wrote: > > - cd $(top_builddir) && ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ > > + cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ > > > The question: Why does Automake add "$(S

Re: Running ./config.status

2005-02-04 Thread Noah Misch
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 08:53:51AM +0100, Stepan Kasal wrote: > - cd $(top_builddir) && ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ > + cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ > The question: Why does Automake add "$(SHELL)" to the command? If you believe `man perlrun', some syst

Running ./config.status

2005-02-03 Thread Stepan Kasal
Hi, I proposed to the following change to a autoconf/tests/Makefile.am[1]: atconfig: $(top_builddir)/config.status - cd $(top_builddir) && ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ + cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@ On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 12:59:28PM -0800, Paul Egg

Re: Revert setting of CONFIG_COMMANDS when running config.status

2001-02-11 Thread Kevin Ryde
Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I've attached a patch only to revert the CONFIG_COMMANDS case. I > think the CONFIG_LINKS= part in the above is harmless. Oops, yep. It was the links that had been annoying me.

Re: Revert setting of CONFIG_COMMANDS when running config.status

2001-02-10 Thread Tom Tromey
> "Hari" == Raja R Harinath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Hari> Please revert the CONFIG_COMMANDS part of Hari> 2001-02-04 Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hari> * automake.in (handle_configure): Call config.status with empty Hari> CONFIG_LINKS and CONFIG_COMMANDS when regener

Revert setting of CONFIG_COMMANDS when running config.status

2001-02-09 Thread Raja R Harinath
Hi, Please revert the CONFIG_COMMANDS part of 2001-02-04 Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * automake.in (handle_configure): Call config.status with empty CONFIG_LINKS and CONFIG_COMMANDS when regenerating a file. This doesn't work with beta autoconf 2.49d and AC_OUTPUT(ou