Syntax, shall we?

Mark Ellis mark.uzumati at virgin.net
Sun Feb 3 04:38:22 PST 2002


On 2002.01.28 20:09 Neven Has wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 08:16:55AM -0800, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:
> > > To copy the directories? ;)
> > >
> > > Yes, we could copy the files with "recursive" too, but I think
> it's
> > > somehow more clear and less error-prone if <copy> handles just
> regular
> > > files by default?
> >
> > Hrm? I'm lost, i think i'm missing part of the discussing here.. can
> you
> > perhaps show me an example of what you guys are talking about? :)
> 
> Basically, to have more options in <options>. :)
> 
> Now, we have something like:
> 
> <copy>
>     <options>archive</options>
> 
>     <source></source>
>     <destination></destination>
> </copy>
> 
> But the user might want NOT to preserve links, but still copy some
> directory recursively (for example the kernel).
> 
> Since "archive" is "no-dereference" + "preserve" + "recursive",
> splitting
> the archive option which Mark mentioned would be adding 3 new options.
> 
> 

Exactly. This came up with one of the packages with broken 
installation, can't remember which. After copying the binaries to the 
correct places i had to reset the permissions, which obviously easy 
enough with a <permissions> element, but is nicer as part of the copy. 
Specifying archive for a single binary seemed odd.

Mark
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list