ar script and bison errors

Peter Naulls peter at chocky.org
Sun Feb 24 10:33:21 PST 2002


In message <m3zo1yhhip.fsf at nick.ws.noc.dsvr.net>
          Nick Burrett <nick at dsvr.net> wrote:

> Peter Naulls <peter at chocky.org> writes:

> > Unix Archives don't immediately imply ELF format (at least, IMO).
> > The point of this is to allow flexibility, and ease of porting.  In many
> > cases, the AR tool is configurable, but in some cases it's hardwired to
> > ar, which means changing the makefile.
> 
> OK. But I don't think we need to support Unix archives to support
> `ar' since the majority of its functionality is already supported by
> Libfile and it is merely an interface issue.
> 
> Creating a binary called `ar' that just takes different arguments to
> libfile, but has the libfile backend should suffice, IMHO.

I'm not sure if you're confusing the issues slightly or not.  The unix
archive support would be to drlink - I don't think this would be very
hard to add, since it really just runs all the files together.  The
usefulness of this would be when the 'ar' tool is hardwired, and hence,
created with the native system ar tool.

Peter


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Peter Naulls - peter at chocky.org
 RISC OS Projects Initiative  -  http://www.chocky.org/initiative/
 Java for RISC OS and ARM     -  http://www.chocky.org/java/
 Debian Linux on RiscPCs      -  http://www.chocky.org/debian/
------------------------------------------------------------------------



More information about the gcc mailing list