On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:46:46PM +1000, Brian Havard wrote: >... > > - elif test -f "$withval/apr-config"; then > > + elif test -x "$withval/apr-config"; then > > apr_found="yes" > > apr_config="$withval/apr-config" > > elif test -x "$withval" && $withval --help > /dev/null 2>&1 ; then > > Was there any actual need to do this? I ask because it breaks the OS/2 > build due to the fact that OS/2 has no 'x' bit in the file system. "test > -x" is only true if the file has a .exe extension which apr-config > obviously does not.
Well, the apr-config file is generated, so it normally comes out without an executable flag. We then have a chmod +x (see at the end of configure.in) which should get run during the generation step. I switched to -x to avoid the case of an apr-config that wasn't make executable, and to avoid thinking we have a valid apr-config and then try to run the thing. That said: I'd be fine with loosening it up to just -f, as long as you put in some "dnl" comments on why we chose -f rather than -x. (otherwise, three years from now, somebody will go and patch it to put the -x flags back in there :-) Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
