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" <[email protected]> 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
