Re: /usr/local/bin/perl

[Adam Spiers <adam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bart Schaefer (schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Aug 15,  3:54pm, Adam Spiers wrote:
> }
> } > }    Test/ztst.zsh            :   #!/usr/local/bin/zsh -f
> } > 
> } > That should be ".../zsh -f +Z".
> } 
> } Indeed, and I believe that I've had tests misleadingly fail through
> } running `make test' before `make install' as a result of that.
> 
> You shouldn't have.  `make test' explicitly calls zsh by full path and
> passes it ztst.zsh by name.

Ahah.  Ignore that then; the failures have been fixed now anyway.

> } Shall I change it then?
> 
> I'm not sure it'll help,

Agreed, now that I know how make test works.

> as many OSs won't accept more than one argument after the command
> path when interpreting a #! line. (That's likely why you are having
> trouble with `env perl -w'.)

Gosh, looks like that applies even to a standard Linux box.  How
extraordinary.  What's the reasoning behind that, I wonder?

> } We can persuade emacs to use the right mode using the other method:
> } 
> }   # Local Variables:
> }   # mode:cperl
> }   # End:
> } 
> } should do it.
> 
> Please don't.  I find it aesthetically displeasing to have that cruft
> at the end of every file, and I hate having emacs stop during file load
> to ask whether it should pay attention to it, and it's not secure to
> simply always accept it.  I'd rather just type M-x cperl-mode if emacs
> has got it wrong.

Agreed, it is pretty nasty.  There are other elisp hacks you can solve
the problem with anyway.

> } If we use configure, presumably that would mean having (say)
> } Utils/helpfiles auto-generated from Utils/helpfiles.in?  My vote is
> } for that option.
> 
> Yes, that would be it, but my vote is still to avoid mucking with this
> in configure.  Maybe something like the following, run through the
> just-compiled zsh?

I suppose that's fine, as long as it wouldn't mess things up if you
ran it twice.  I still slightly prefer going via configure, as that
way you're not altering CVS files.  You probably have a more
convincing argument the other way though :-)