This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: automake 1.4 : --copy problem?
- To: David Lee <t dot d dot lee at durham dot ac dot uk>,automake at gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: automake 1.4 : --copy problem?
- From: Gary V. Vaughan <gary at oranda dot demon dot co dot uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2001 20:33:37 +0100
- List-Id: Discussion list for automake <automake.gnu.org>
- Organization: GNU
- References: <Pine.GSO.3.95-960729.1010625175040.6309F-100000@arachne.dur.ac.uk>
Hi David,
This is a long standing bug that has been fixed in release versions since
automake-1.4-p1. You can always find the latest automake release at
ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/automake/ or any of the gnu mirrors.
Cheers,
Gary.
On Monday 25 June 2001 6:07 pm, David Lee wrote:
> Background: we are trying to "autoconfiscate" the "linux-ha" package (for
> high availability work).
>
> With automake 1.4, I try
> automake --foreign --add-missing --copy
>
> and get:
>
> automake: configure.in: installing `./install-sh'
> error while copying
>
> automake: configure.in: installing `./mkinstalldirs'
> error while copying
>
> automake: configure.in: installing `./missing'
> error while copying
>
> Despite these alarming-looking errors, these three copied files still end
> up in place OK: repeating the same command is then OK.
>
> If I leave off the "--copy", so that it creates symlinks instead of copies,
> it is OK:
> automake: configure.in: installing `./install-sh'
> automake: configure.in: installing `./mkinstalldirs'
> automake: configure.in: installing `./missing'
> and I end up with three symlinks, as expected.
>
>
> Looking at the "automake" in my system, I see at line 6910:
> elsif (! system ('cp', $am_dir . '/' . $file, $errfile))
> {
> $suppress = 0;
> $trailer = "\n error while copying\n";
> }
>
> I suspect that the "!" should be absent (perhaps some confusion over the
> opposite numeric OK/fail conventions in perl vs. UNIX return codes).
>
>
> I have the feeling this must be a very well-known problem. Is it? If so,
> can you give me any background to it.
>
> It is possible that we can live with the problem for the time being
> (especially as work on the next version of automake is so well in hand).
> But information about it would be exceedingly useful, and any reasonable
> solutions would be a nice bonus.
>
> Thanks in advance.
--
())_. Gary V. Vaughan gary@(oranda.demon.co.uk|gnu.org)
( '/ Research Scientist http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk ,_())____
/ )= GNU Hacker http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool \' `&
`(_~)_ Tech' Author http://sources.redhat.com/autobook =`---d__/