Nicola Pero wrote:
>>Hi Nicola,
>>
>>hope you're fine. I just got my hands on a (slow) Solaris 2.8 box. First 
>>thing I did was install a fresh-from-cvs GNUstep on that box. Then I 
>>compiled the ED* frameworks and noticed a build failure that I didn't 
>>expect. It turns out that in target build-framework-dirs of 
>>Instance/framework.make all [ ! -L foo ] tests fail due to Solaris' 
>>/bin/sh not offering the -L test (failure is: "test: expected argument 
>>missing"). Instead, I had to rewrite all occurences with  /bin/test ! -L 
>>foo (which works). Not sure how one could rewrite that easily and still 
>>remain portable, probably by introducing something like platform.make in 
>>the NeXT makefile packages?
> 
> 
> Hi - I'm still not sure how to fix this problem - we do have platform
> specific configurations, but I'm not sure it would help with this.
> 
> Maybe someone else has a good suggestion.
> 

I think 'test' is generally more portable than '[ ... ]' (In fact it's 
already used in one place in framework.make.) Is there any reason why it 
should not be used?

-- 
Adam Fedor, Digital Optics Corp.      | I'm glad I hate spinach, because
http://www.doc.com                    | if I didn't, I'd eat it, and you
                                       | know how I hate the stuff.


_______________________________________________
Bug-gnustep mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep

Reply via email to