Subject: Re: install -d -c or maybe makefile
To: Larry Lee <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: J.T. Conklin <email@example.com>
Date: 09/14/1994 10:04:16
> There has been some discussion recently about install -d -c features
> or lack thereof.
> As a point of discussion, and not a bug report or change request,
> would it not be appropriate to change most 'install' commands in the
> makefiles to 'install -d'. In this way the makes would create the
> required target directory structure, and only those directories that
> are required. As a result it would be much more convenient to allow
> both the -d and -c directives on a single line.
At one time, many of the makefiles had "install -d" commands in the
install targets so that directories were created. This was changed when
we found that the "mtree" files (in src/etc/mtree/*) conflicted with the
user and group ownership or file permissions set in the makefiles. Since
it is easier to maintain one set of mtree files compared to several
hundred makefiles, we decided that mtree would be used to create any
All you should need to do to create missing directories and to fix
incorrect ownership and permissions is to make "distrib-dirs" (or something
like that) in ~/src/etc.
As to why I think "install -d -c" is a bad idea: How often will the
directory and the file you are installing share exactly the same ownership
and permissions? And how difficult is it to and an additional line to the
makefile so it is clear that both a directory is to be created and a file
is to be installed?