This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: Possible bug with generic build script.


> 
> Well, I don't mind adding code that'll do both kinds of copies (using
> "install" in the flat case, and "tar" in the tree case), but the main
> question is how to distinguish between them?  I.e., as you said, does
> "doc/*.html" mean a flat copy or a tree copy?  Does "doc/*.html/" for tree
> copy look too ugly?  Do we ever want to flatten directory structure,
> anyway?  That is, can we always take "doc/*.html" to mean a tree copy?  Or
> do we just have two variables -- "install_docs" and "install_doc_dirs"
> (yuck!)?

If you really want to get ugly - add a 3rd and 4th,
"install_docs_target_base_dir" matching 1 for 1 entries in the above two. Or
stay with 2 and make every second entry the target dir.
Install_docs = "\
ChangeLog ${doc_root}/ \
Doc/ChangeLog* ${doc_root}/doc/ \ 
Doc/annoyingFile ${doc_root}/annoying/SubDir/ \
Doc/*/ImConfused/ ${doc_root}/nowhere/matched/ \
"

The disgusting possibilities are endless :)

On more realistic terms - I am thinking that 'tree copy with wild card
matching' and 'recursive tree copy probably without wild card matching' are
probably the most common concepts.  The 'flattened copy' shouldn't be needed
since theoretically the layout of the original package contents is
'reasonable'.  In my case I used flattened copy because a) it was easier to
do with the existing g-b-s and b) asthetics, having a docs subdir in a
documentation directory just seems wrong.  A) was a much stronger point then
b).

Regards,
Gareth Pearce



Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]