[erlang-questions] escript lives

[Bengt Kleberg]

On 2006-10-15 21:33, Wayne Vucenic wrote:
...deleted
> Mini:~/erlang/escript-4.0 wayne$ make
> erlc escript.erl
> make: *** No rule to make target `.beam', needed by `all'.  Stop.
> 
> as the erlc line above suggests, it actually did make the .beam file,
> so I'm not sure why it thinks it needs to remake it but can't.

the erlc line says it will create escript.beam.
the ''No rule'' line talks about a a file called ''.beam''. did you get 
one of those?

the reason for this error is that ''BEAM_FILES = $(MODS:=.beam)'' in the 
Makefile probably gets expanded to ''.beam''. in the Makefile, try to 
replace ''all: ${BEAM_FILES} escript'' with
all:
	echo ${BEAM_FILES}

and run make again. email the output, please.

...deleted
> to work around this, I changed the Makefile line
> 
> all: ${BEAM_FILES} escript
> 
> to
> 
> all: escript.beam escript
> 
> this gets us past the .beam error, but now it has trouble making escript
> 
> Mini:~/erlang/escript-4.0 wayne$ make
> ./mk_escript.sh
> make: ./mk_escript.sh: Command not found
> make: *** [escript] Error 127

i think that the mode of ''mk_escript.sh'' has lost the executable (x) 
flag. if you untar all files into a new directory, what is the mode of 
mk_escript.sh?
if it is not executable you could add
	chmod +x mk_escript.sh
in the Makefile just before
	./mk_escript.sh

well, actually joe should. or escript could get put into jungerl and 
anybody could.


bengt
-- 
    EPO guidelines 1978: "If the contribution to the known art resides
    solely in a computer program then the subject matter is not
    patentable in whatever manner it may be presented in the claims."