Hi,
On Tue Aug 16, 2022 at 5:47 PM CEST, Laslo Hunhold wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 11:09:16 +0200
> "Roberto E. Vargas Caballero" <k0ga_AT_shike2.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Roberto,
>
> > Because then you will support only the last systems. If you keep
> > the ranlib you will support systems that support all versions of
> > the standard. Again, if you find a system without ranlib then
> > we can talk and consider what to do, but removing only for the sake
> > of "the standard does not include anymore ranlib" is a horrible idea.
> > For example, scc requires the use of ranlib, if you remove it then
> > I will not be able to continue testing scc with suckless software.
> > What happens if I want to compile sbase in an old SunOs workstation?
>
> I thought about it a bit more in the last few weeks and added ranlib
> again.
>
> The main reason is that I find it convincing that POSIX would not try
> to define varying binary formats, which is why the toolchain-tool
> ranlib(1) was probably never included.
>
> Adding the s-flag to ar is simply an unexpected and ill-fitting
> feature-creep that bloats up an otherwise simple archive-tool.
>
> Thanks for this very interesting discussion and sharing your
> experience!
>
> With best regards
>
> Laslo
It was indeed interesting. We should also undo the libzahl patch then.
--
Best Regards,
Tom Schwindl
Received on Tue Aug 16 2022 - 18:02:26 CEST