> -----Original Message----- > From: > avr-libc-dev-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu.org > [mailto:avr-libc-dev-bounces+eric.weddington=atmel....@nongnu. > org] On Behalf Of Joerg Wunsch > Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:14 PM > To: avr-libc-dev@nongnu.org > Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Adding (some) Procyon AVRlib > functionalitytoavr-libc > > As Ruddick Lawrence wrote: > > > I think LibAVR might be too confusing. > > I agree, though I also see Eric's point: assuming it will really > become an object library, a link specification like -lavr looks > good. > > But then, just because the object library is named libavr.a, nobody > says this must exactly match the project name. ;-) > > (I really wonder what the "possible virus" might have been. :)
The fact that I sent a .zip file to the mailing list. Regarding naming, here's another thought: Why does it even have to have a separate name? If it's part of avr-libc, then let it be that: just a part of avr-libc. The library that is built could be named 'libavr.a' and one links to it with '-lavr', but it's still avr-libc. We could have a separate mailing list to discuss development of it, but why do we have to? _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
