RE: chmod -R u+w .build/src EACH TIME?????

[ANDY KENNEDY <ANDY dot KENNEDY at adtran dot com>]

> On Thursday 03 March 2011 00:07:22 ANDY KENNEDY wrote:
> > What about something along the lines of
> [--SNIP stamp file suggestion--]
> 
> Nope, that's too cumbersome. Also, there already are stamp files
created,
> so if we were to use stamp files, we'd be better off re-using the
> existing ones.
> 
> Basically, your 1 minute offset would not work here, the extract takes
> less than one minute for me, for example, so I'd still suffer the long
> chmod...

You didn't understand the point of the one minute offset.  This was so
that
all directories in the CWD would hold the same time as an arbitrary
known unmodified point.  To set the touch one minute in the past assures
that when we recheck to see if anything has changed, only directories
that
have been modified will have a variant of the timestamp by at least one
minute.  See, we take the Doc's Delorean, hit 88MPH and go back in time
precisely one minute.  When _anything_ in the filesystem is updated, we
have our variant(s).

It worked.  I know, because I tested the case that you mentioned by
doing
a script along the lines of 

<my previous script stuff>
touch {some,dir,I,created}/{more,than,one,file}
<my previous "did it change?" script stuff>

and I got the answers I was expecting.


> 
> > Yes, I understand I'm a sick puppy, but hey, if it would keep from
> > having to re-chmod the WHOLE directory EVERY time, it would be a
> > good thing.
> 
> Yes, I think I'll look at implementing what Thomas suggested.
> 
> Or the easiest would be for the offending package(s) to actually do
> the chmod if required. Maybe I'll resort to this solution...

<this is response to what you said to Thomas>

I don't really understand why you are not allowed to extract into known
source directories?  If it is due to the fact that some tarballs you 
extract are overwriting dirs that are expected to be in CWD, could you
not contain all of the offending dirs into a single dir -- yes, you
would
have to reach out a bit deeper to get to the offending Makefile(s) but
you could then control the names of the extract directories.  All in
all,
it would make the scripts easier to write (I would think).

This is, in fact, what I'm doing in BuildRoot for proprietary code that 
we are getting from our code repo.  I make the offensive (usually third
party) code be one level deep and I supply a Makefile that preps the
build another level deep.

> 
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.
> 
> --
>
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.-------------
-------.
> |  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics'
conspiracy: |
> | +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___
|
> | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/
There is no  |
> | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v
conspiracy.  |
>
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^-------------
-------'

Andy

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq