[openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- From: Jérôme Duval <korli@xxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:46:20 +0200
Hi Waldemar,
i didn't test what you describe but i think there is something about installed
targets too. The OBOSInstall rule generates an installed target name from your
<bin>route and route and it gets the same, so you only got one installed.
What you can try is adding an install grist on the bin route like this :
OBOSInstall install-networking
: [ FDirName $(OBOS_TEST_DIR) kits net ]
: <bin>route
: <installedbin> ;
or
OBOSInstall install-networking
: [ FDirName $(OBOS_TEST_DIR) kits net ]
: <bin>route
: installedbin ;
This is just an idea, not tested at all...
Jerome
Selon Waldemar Kornewald <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx>:
> Hi,
> the route kernel module and the <bin>route command are conflicting. The
> OBOSInstall rule does not work for the kernel module. It only installs the
> <bin>route command. Is there some problem in our Jamrule that makes them
> conflict because they have equal names (except for the <bin> prefix)?
> Can somebody (unfortunately, again Ingo? ;) please help me?
>
> Thank you.
>
> Bye,
> Waldemar
>
>
- Follow-Ups:
- [openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- References:
- [openbeos] Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- From: Waldemar Kornewald
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- » [openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- » [openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- » [openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- [openbeos] Re: Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- From: Ingo Weinhold
- [openbeos] Jamfile and OBOSInstall rule
- From: Waldemar Kornewald