| Date Of Receipt: 22-JUN-1993 15:42:54.13
From: QUARRY::"[email protected]"
To: QUARRY::woodburn
CC: QUARRY::buildhelp
Subj: RE: Does 'build install_all' let me rename files?
The install can't change file names that I know of.
I think the only way you can do what you want is to just install the file
Mkf.native and then make an installed symbolic link of Makefile to Mkf.native.
I can never remember the rules for specifying symbolic links, but I'm pretty
sure it can be done.
--Kim
===========================================================================
From: QUARRY::woodburn "Tom Woodburn 22-Jun-1993 1517" 22-JUN-1993
12:18:03.93
To: buildhelp@DEC:.zko.quarry
CC: woodburn@DEC:.zko.quarry, i18n@DEC:.zko.quarry
Subj: Does 'build install_all' let me rename files?
In src/usr/examples/i18n/xpg4demo, I have two makefiles:
Makefile and Mkf.native. Makefile is used in our builds and
contains stuff like DATAFILES, IDIR, etc. Mkf.native is for
customers to use in compiling the example program.
When I do a "build install_all", I'd like Mkf.native to be
installed in the output area under the name "Makefile".
From looking at the install rules, I don't think I can do
that.
Can anyone help? Thanks.
Another way of looking at the problem is this: I'd like to
get a file named "Makefile" on the kit, but I don't want it
to be the Makefile used in the build.
Tom
|
| Date Of Receipt: 22-JUN-1993 16:38:34.66
From: FLUME::jmcg "Jim McGinness"
To: flume::buildhelp, flume::woodburn
CC: flume::i18n
Subj: Re: Does 'build install_all' let me rename files?
I think the best way to handle this is to let Mkf.native travel to the
output pack in the normal way and create a SYMLINK to it named Makefile.
This is a little awkward, but has the (small) advantage that we're
a little less likely to be confused if we go looking for the sourcefile
for the output Makefile.
-- jmcg
|