This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: astksh review
- From: Elfyn McBratney <elfyn at ubertales dot co dot uk>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 09:35:34 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: RE: astksh review
On Mon, 19 May 2003, Karsten Fleischer wrote:
> > Sorry I missed this (my backlog is HUGE! :-)
> > I created the ksh symlink so users wouldn't have to edit
> > their shebang
> > lines to point to `/bin/pdksh' but now we have the proper ksh
> > (available)
> > I suppose I could get rid of it. What's the feeling?
> > We could do one of
> > 1. Remove the ksh symlink from the pdksh package.
> > 2. Rename ksh.exe (in astksh) to astksh.exe and have a ksh
> > symlink to
> > astksh.exe
> The proper name would be ksh93.exe.
Oops, that's what I meant. :-)
> > 3. Maybe only two options. :-)
> > these?
> I don't want to manually intervene the astksh package generation
> process. It's all done by the package command and nmake.
> The ast-ksh.pkg nmakefile defines the rules for astksh packaging.
> There's a :INSTALL: operator that can be used to rename ksh for cygwin
> packages, so the :INSTALL: line should read:
> bin/ksh93 :INSTALL: bin/ksh
> There's currently no :LINK: operator. I'll define one so that symlinks
> in cygwin packages can be automically generated.
> I already wrote a :POSTINSTALL: operator that can be used to define the
> contents of a postinstall script.
> I could check for existance of a ksh symlink in the postinstall script
> and create it if it's missing.
OK, so what we do is check for the existence of a ksh symlink, if it
exists we leave it alone, if it doesn't we create it (?).