2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:43:45
"type"? That's probably better than using "which", but sounds quite wrong. Why not add Makefile target that the shell scripts depend on to see if necessary tools are available and let the builder know if they are not?
From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:43:45
Hi, On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"type"? That's probably better than using "which", but sounds quite wrong. Why not add Makefile target that the shell scripts depend on to see if necessary tools are available and let the builder know if they are not?
I thought the accord was that "cpio" is a _runtime_ dependency. But yes, I agree "type" is not necessarily the best choice. Maybe testing the exit code for 127 (not found) is the better choice? Ciao, Dscho