Am Dienstag, den 24.04.2007, 08:29 -0400 schrieb Justin Pryzby: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:33:15AM +0200, Manuel Prinz wrote: > [...] > > Are there any guideline how this is done? I've seen packages using > > "foo.bin" for the original binary and "foo" for the wrapper script, or > > some using a different location such as /usr/lib/foo/bin for the binary. > > Or should one leave the binary as "foo" to provide the know behavior and > > use "foo-wrapper" for the script? > These are all possibilities from which to choose depending on your > goals. Another possibility is to make source changes to support > --input, --output, --[no-]remove. Unfortunately, this is not easily possible due to limitations in Fortran. This would require a recent Fortran compiler that supports Fortran2003, which is AFAIK not standard. (I can just say from my own experience.) We have those in Debian, but I'm not sure about other distributions. The program as is compiles fine with F77 compilers, so I thought it may be easier to enhance functionality by a shell script, as suggested by upstream. > [...] > The Debian tools to create tempfiles are tmpfile and mktemp. These > will use /tmp by default, and handle TMPDIR. Or, if you put the > tempfiles in the same dir as the final pathnames, then you can do "mv" > and it will be atomic. Or, you can use mkdtemp -d to make a directory > directly below the final pathname (also guaranteed to be on the same > FS). Since it's a new dir, you can assume it's empty. If ther user > modifies things in it you can assume they know what they're doing. Thanks for the pointers, that was what I'm looking for! Best regards, Manuel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil