On 2/15/07, Jonathan Levi, M.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In a recent thread, "Can't Compile Gimp2, OS X 10.3.9 Unstable", I
> reported a problem compiling gimp2 that the maintainer, Alexander
> Strange, related to a broken /sw/bin/rm. It seems he was right: After
> failing to compile gimp2 twice at the same step, I followed his
> advice and removed /sw/bin/rm (actually, I moved it to
> /sw/bin/rm.ori). The compile process then used /bin/rm and completed
> successfully.
>
> Nevertheless, it seems to me a not-so-good idea that /sw/bin/rm
> should remain broken. Does anyone know how it might be fixed?
> --Jonathan
>

(actually, I thought I suggested removing the package that provided
it, rather than the executable itself--but it was late so I probably
wasn't clear in my explanation)

It's not "broken", per se.  The coreutils package has newer (GNU)
versions of some of the base programs than are provided by the system,
but in some cases they don't function absolutely identically.  This is
one of those cases.

What has been done is that these executables have been placed in a
nonstandard location out of the PATH by "coreutils", and only move
into the PATH if the "coreutils-default" package is chosen.

The other thing that is done is for the maintainer of a package to
state explicitly that the system's version be used, e.g. via an
explicit "/bin/rm" call.  That way the proper functionality is
guaranteed even if coreutils-default is installed.

-- 
Alexander K. Hansen
(akh)
Fink Documenter (still)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users

Reply via email to