Viktor Szakáts wrote:
Viktor,
HB_INSTALL_PREFIX is wrong on OS/2, it points to
HB_INSTALL_PREFIX set to: E:\repository\harbour
which is where I have my copy of the svn source tree.
It's meant to point there. This is the only location
we surely know we can install to without doing any
harm to the system. It also produces a working binary
tree this way. In this case it's normal that 'install'
shows errors telling src and dst filenames are identical,
these can be ignored.
e:\repository\harbour hosts, in my PC, the svn tree from the
repository; so
when it copies include, for example, what happens?
It will do 'copy header.h header.h' which will usually
throw an error, which will be ignored by GNU Make
(that's why we need '-' prefix for the copy commands
in instsh.sh). GNU cp, may not show an error in this
case, but I think this depends on the platform (or version?).
And why is it called PREFIX? I have HB_???_INSTALL envvars pointing
somewhere
else, the 'PREFIX' part makes me thing that this gets attacched to
the head of
HB_??_INSTALL, but this is not the case.
It's just an easy way to tell where to put Harbour. On
non-*nix systems 99.9% of users will use the exact same
structure inside the base Harbour dir, so for these users,
it makes configuration much simpler (one line vs 4).
Probably everybody would resort to such a local variable
anyway to reduce redundancy. So Harbour provides it
convenience. Note it's a very old variable, I didn't add
it now. HB_*_INSTALL variables are still there for those
who want to fine tune the installation, plus *nix system.
And I don't think OS/2 cmd.exe is able to correctly execute most of
postinst.cmd; I'll do some tests an let you know.
I did my best reading all the scarce documentation
on OS/2 versions of commands, many times I have to
guess, I hate to work like this and chances are very
high to do mistakes, I'd prefer if OS/2 users would
update this, if I have to do it it will look like this.
[ I wonder how can there be errors in most cmds,
as hbmk.cfg is created ok, the remaining 5 commands
are simple 'if ... xcopy' ones, only there can be
problem. ]
Ok, reading hbmk.cfg lines I thought that there were unresolved
references;
those %%{XXX}.
Actually they should look: %{XXX}. So if there is double
%% in hbmk.cfg, it's a bug and has to be fixed. On win/dos
double %% needs to be echoed to get a single % in output.
Maybe OS/2 is different here.
Anyway, please test/fix them.
I'll do.
Thank you.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
