Please reply to list only (I have Mail-Followup-To: set), or at least use the same message for both replies, so I don't have to reply twice. Thank you.
* Volker Boerchers wrote on Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 03:57:35PM CEST: > On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Thu, Jun 24, 2004 at 02:16:37AM CEST: > > > >> [using 'cp -u' or similar within Automake's install* rules] > > > > If you change the install semantics, please consider keeping the > > 'one install line echoed per file' rule. Please also make the new > > behavior (e.g. not overwriting files with newer timestamp) optional, > > the default being the old behavior. Otherwise, hard-to-debug > > failures could occur. > > an easy way to replace 'install' is to overwrite the INSTALL variable > temporarily (at least with gnu make): > > make INSTALL=myinstall install Yes, I know, thank you. I was not referring to a particular way to install a particular software, but rather to the way the Automake install rules should work. Say, I test a package in a second build tree with different compile options, and then decide to re-install the old package from the first build tree, I do not want to end up with a mixed installation even if I forgot to 'make uninstall' in between. I just would not expect 'make install' to behave that way. Does that make the intention of my comment clear? Regards, Ralf
