Re: [PATCH 05/10] install: check for non-SysV version (Solaris support)

diff --git a/27/18ec5f837d79a3d39f44780f8bcc27936e78fe b/27/18ec5f837d79a3d39f44780f8bcc27936e78fe
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..ec9d60f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/27/18ec5f837d79a3d39f44780f8bcc27936e78fe
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+Return-Path: <blakej@foo.net>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0AA4431FAF\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun,  4 Nov 2012 21:27:07 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: 0\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]\r
+       autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id VZBn+WYr7JpI for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Sun,  4 Nov 2012 21:27:07 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from foo.net (70-36-235-136.dsl.static.sonic.net [70.36.235.136])\r
+       (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1733D431FAE\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Sun,  4 Nov 2012 21:27:07 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from foo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by foo.net (8.14.5+Sun/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA55R4m9013730;\r
+       Sun, 4 Nov 2012 21:27:04 -0800 (PST)\r
+To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>\r
+Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] install: check for non-SysV version (Solaris\r
+       support) \r
+In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 04 Nov 2012 23:31:02 +0200."\r
+       <87d2ztf42x.fsf@nikula.org> \r
+Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2012 21:27:04 -0800\r
+Message-ID: <13729.1352093224@foo.net>\r
+From: Blake Jones <blakej@foo.net>\r
+X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2\r
+       (foo.net [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 04 Nov 2012 21:27:04 -0800 (PST)\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 05:27:08 -0000\r
+\r
+> > +INSTALL="install"\r
+> > +printf "Checking for working \"install\" program... "\r
+> > +mkdir _tmp_\r
+> \r
+> This doesn't feel like a hot idea.\r
+\r
+Out of curiosity, why not?  An "install" that behaves as expected is\r
+one of the first things that an autoconf-generated "configure" looks\r
+for.  Now, autoconf-configure implements that check using some\r
+assumptions about where things are on different operating systems,\r
+but that sort of check runs the risk of becoming stale (see below).\r
+\r
+> Don't tell me you'd need to create a compatibility script for using\r
+> mktemp --tmpdir too...\r
+\r
+Yes I would, if it were used; not all the world's a GNU.  But in the\r
+case of mktemp, the widely available "-p" and "-t" options seem to get\r
+you most of the way there.  The SVR4 "install" in Solaris' /usr/sbin is\r
+different enough from the BSD/GNU versions that I wouldn't want to try\r
+to emulate it with a wrapper.\r
+\r
+> Or how about just always using ginstall on Solaris?\r
+\r
+I'd rather not do that.  With the old UCB tools having been EOL'ed [1],\r
+/usr/ucb/install (which would have worked) will be going away.  There is\r
+an open bug in the Sun bug tracking system about moving GNU install to\r
+/usr/bin/install, specifically motivated by this change.  So while I\r
+don't know if/when that bug will be fixed, I would guess [2] that a\r
+future release of Solaris may have a BSD/GNU-compatible version of\r
+"install" in the default $PATH.\r
+\r
+Blake\r
+\r
+[1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/systems/end-of-notices/eonsolaris11-392732.html\r
+[2] Caveat: I work for Oracle in the Solaris kernel group, but I am not\r
+    speaking for my employer.\r