Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 18:15:13 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200004282215.SAA26945@indy.delorie.com>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT delorie DOT com>
To: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <3908A6AD.7D7FBAC0@bigfoot.com> (message from Richard Dawe on
	Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:44:29 +0100)
Subject: Re: Some questions about porting fileutils 4.0
References: <39081435 DOT E2EDBC04 AT bigfoot DOT com> <200004272025 DOT QAA25550 AT indy DOT delorie DOT com> <3908A6AD DOT 7D7FBAC0 AT bigfoot DOT com>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 21:44:29 +0100
> From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > No, the top-level Makefile is `Makefile'.  If you have run the
> > configure script, it should have created `Makefile' in the top-level
> > directory (as well as in subdirectories).
> 
> Yep, it has - I'm running Linux right now, but here it is:
> 
> iolanthe:/shared/develop/ports/gnu/filutil4.0 =] ls -al *akefile
> -rwxrwxr-x   1 root     dosusers      676 Apr 27 10:13 GNUmakefile*
> -rwxrwxr-x   1 root     dosusers    11832 Apr 27 10:15 Makefile*
> 
> > When Make is run by just typing "make [Enter]", it defaults to
> > `Makefile', and only if `Makefile' doesn't exist (and if it's GNU Make),
> > does it turn to `GNUmakefile'.
> 
> Well, it seems to be using 'GNUmakefile' for me. When I just type 'make'
> it uses GNUmakefile. I have to force 'Makefile' to be used using 'make -f
> Makefile'. This happens with make 3.77 and make 3.79.

Sorry, you are right.  I simply forgot how this is set up.

The problem _is_ the missing "SHELL=/bin/sh" in GNUmakefile.  If you
put it there, it will all begin to work when you say "make".

You will see that GNUmakefile, when it finds a Makefile, simply
includes it and runs it.  It didn't work for you because $(shell)
invoked COMMAND.COM, and therefore failed to set have-Makefile to
"yes".

> > Getting that right in the mainline sources would clutter them with
> > endless #ifdef's, which no GNU maintainer in their right mind would
> > accept.
> 
> I couldn't really blame them for that. fileutils does seem a little more
> DJGPP-aware now, at least in uid, gid handling - there are some '#ifdef
> __DJGPP__'s scattered around.

Please try to minimize them.  Some of them might not be necessary
anymore, due to features we now have in DJGPP.  As for others, there
might be ways of producing the same effect that pollute the sources
less.

The less changes there will be in the mainline sources, the easier it
will be for Jim Meyering, who maintains Fileutils, to accept them.

> If things go well, I may have an alpha version out this weekend.

Great!