Re: [dev] Is there a reason to use install(1)?

On 29 May 2010, at 23:20, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:

>
> On 29 May 2010, at 22:56, markus schnalke wrote:
>>
>> You mean, install is just meant as a wrapper around the standard
>> tools
>> to express the actions in a more compact way. (btw: It's a shame that
>> install isn't a shell script then.)
>
> Autoconf'd packages usually include install-sh for systems which
> don't have it. The copy of instlal-sh I'm looking at right now is
> 323 lines; no idea why.

Ha! It's 323 lines and doesn't even include automatic directory
creation. At least, it doesn't have the -D option.

-- 
Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. -- Alan Perlis