Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk Message-ID: <3E1D9E47.1B9B9A23@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 16:07:35 +0000 From: Richard Dawe X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586) X-Accept-Language: de,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: m4 port: return program name as 'm4' not '/some/path/m4.exe'[PATCH] References: <3E1D3BDE DOT C5BDCF79 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <1042113439 DOT 10441 DOT 21 DOT camel AT leeloo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Hello. Tim Van Holder wrote: [snip] > Ho hum - I was talking in the context of a path search (I highly doubt > running 'test -x' will _ever_ do a path search by itself; 'test -x rm' > won't return true unless you're in /bin or /usr/bin or whatever). > > In the case of using > > test -x /usr/local/bin/m4 > > however, test -x WILL return true if /usr/local/bin/m4 refers to a > directory (that the current user can cd into). You'd need 'test -f foo > && test -x foo' for a more foolproof test. > > And that is what happened in autoconf's AC_PROG_PATH if 'test -x' was > used as executable test instead of 'test -f' Ah, thanks for clarifying. My conversions of 'test -f' to 'test -x' in the autoconf 2.57 test suite (in the DJGPP port) should be fine, then. (But I am planning to go back and convert it to use 'test -f' and $EXEEXT sometime.) Thanks, bye, Rich =] -- Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]