On Thu, Mar 08 2018, Daniel Jacques jotted: >> It would be great to have this rebooted now that my perl cleanup efforts >> have un-blocked this. Will be happy to help review & test the next >> iteration. > > Yes, I was just thinking the same thing. I wanted to make sure the Perl > changes had landed, and I'm pleased to see that they have. I should have > time in the next few days to rebase and put up a new version of the patch > series. I'll keep you in the loop, and thanks for pinging! Related to this, I came across this bug report https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/omnibus-gitlab/issues/3265 which is wondering why we're installing N copies of the git binary, presumably they're building with NO_INSTALL_HARDLINKS. Just doing this: diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index de4b8f0c02..2222319a4f 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -2596,7 +2596,7 @@ endif for p in git$X $(filter $(install_bindir_programs),$(ALL_PROGRAMS)); do \ $(RM) "$$execdir/$$p" && \ test -z "$(NO_INSTALL_HARDLINKS)$(NO_CROSS_DIRECTORY_HARDLINKS)" && \ - ln "$$bindir/$$p" "$$execdir/$$p" 2>/dev/null || \ + ln -s "$$bindir/$$p" "$$execdir/$$p" 2>/dev/null || \ cp "$$bindir/$$p" "$$execdir/$$p" || exit; \ done; \ } && \ Seems to work for me, although obviously this would need to be optional, and it'll get in the way of Daniel's patch since it use the absolute path. But is there any reason anyone can think of for why we shouldn't be figuring out the relative path and symlinking the two?
