[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: autoconf 2.49c fails if '.' is in PATH

From: Alexandre Oliva
Subject: Re: autoconf 2.49c fails if '.' is in PATH
Date: 03 Feb 2001 16:29:32 -0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Crater Lake)

On Feb  3, 2001, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:

> The question is `is $FILE an executable in the common sense'.

I think the best thing to do is to just ignore the issue of whether
the found executable is a directory while testing -x or -f, and test
for -d later on, notifying the user and possibly aborting.  This
second test might have false positives on Cygwin if x/ and x.exe
exist, but I really don't care.  I'd rather warn the user that
something bad is about to happen.

As a data point to support this choice, directories aren't generally
skipped when searching the PATH.  So why should we?

Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see
Red Hat GCC Developer                  address@hidden,}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        address@hidden,}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]