t; >
> > Don't try to get variables set through output from 'make', that's
> > very error-prone.
> That was necessary with my previous "paranoid" approach, as I checked
> that `test -h' and worked correctly *for the current shell* only, not
>
to do so. Let's leave this undefined.
I agree about this; I have rewritten the patch removing the extra test
script `distsolvelinksdir.test'.
But maybe we could also patch distdir.am to make it issue a warning
when a symlink to a directory is being distributed (while continuing
to beha
don't need to hurry to define this unless and until we have a good
way to do so. Let's leave this undefined.
> From ee859147f10c073a6d7bae822e6a4eb259f35e94 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Stefano Lattarini
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:41:01 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] Check tha
ctly the description at:
<http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/cp.html>
So what is the right thing to do about this -- patch distdir.am or
modify the semantic of the new test?
Regards,
Stefano
From ee859147f10c073a6d7bae822e6a4eb259f35e94 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Fr
