Subject: Re: updated install and other patches
To: Michael L. VanLoon -- Iowa State University <>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <cgd@nobozo.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
List: current-users
Date: 01/09/1994 14:32:20
> OK, I've had lots of people ask for my install patches, so here they
> are.  I've included four patches.  The first two are for xinstall.c
> and install.1 (the man page).  These can stand by themselves if you
> just want the functionality.

I, personally, am not too hot on seeing this stuff go in to the
NetBSD source tree, especially not the change to 'install'.

Why not, you ask?

When you install a new version of a file, it's not the same
file as either what was previously in the destination, or as
the file that's being copied.  It's a different inode, and it could
be different in other ways -- like if you're installing with -s,
strip could have changed.  It's different, it should have
a different date.

Also, on a more practical side:

The install change *doesn't* solve the problem of library dates
being changed; he uses touch to do that.  You *can't* do it
with install, because you need to ranlib -t the library, too.
He needed to use touch to solve that, the original problem.

As for the rest of the system, the only things which would make you
recompile the world are the include files.  Much care is already
taken to keep include files from being re-installed when they're
the same as those already there.

I see the install changes as extraneous and i see the lib
changes as hard to seperate out cleanly, so i think "these
shouldn't happen."