Hi, On Sat, Jan 22, 2005 at 08:52:16PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > If there was a named pipe /tmp/foo with an executable bit set, the test > > could misclasify it as an executable file. ... > FWIW, I don't regard this as ``misclasification'', since the named > pipe does, indeed, have its executable bit set. AS_EXECUTABLE_P is meant to discover _executables_, ie. executable programs. The pipe doesn't fit into this definition. (texi2dvi also needs to discover whether a certain program exists.) > > I'm happy with the current code. (Part of it is my work. :-) > > It does `test -f $1 && test -x $1' on most platforms. > > Would changing it to > > test -f $1 || test -x $1 > > leave you and others happy? Absolutely no, that would succeed for an _executable_ directory. When AS_EXECUTABLE_P was first introduced, it was mere `test -x'. Soon after, problems appeared with m4 and perl: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2001-01/msg00351.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2001-02/msg00080.html Have a nice day, Stepan _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
