Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!seismo!caip!clyde!cbatt!cbosgd!ihnp4!ltuxa!ttrdc!levy From: levy@ttrdc.UUCP Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: ranlib and ``ucb'' Message-ID: <1060@ttrdc.UUCP> Date: Sun, 13-Jul-86 17:29:26 EDT Article-I.D.: ttrdc.1060 Posted: Sun Jul 13 17:29:26 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 14-Jul-86 19:26:14 EDT References: <1916@brl-smoke.ARPA> <1278@ncoast.UUCP> <292@foxvax5.UUCP> <2318@umcp-cs.UUCP> <4976@sun.uucp> Organization: AT&T, Computer Systems Division, Skokie, IL Lines: 37 In article <4976@sun.uucp>, guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) writes: [about System V ar] >> It seems to me that this is the correct external behaviour: the library >> builder should manage its table of contents itself. > >Yes, it's less error-prone, which is presumably why most other OSes do it >this way. (It's not perfect; if you copy an archive file, you have to do >"ar ts >/dev/null" to reconstruct the table of symbols. You >could, of course, write a script to do > > for i in "$@" > do > ar ts $i >/dev/null > done > >and call it "ranlib".... The 4.3BSD "ranlib" has a "touch" option >which merely updates the time on the table-of-symbols member, rather than >rebuilding it, which is useful for the case described above.) >-- > Guy Harris > {ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy > guy@sun.com (or guy@sun.arpa) Ummmm... I beg your royal pardon? Under the System V systems HERE, I am unaware of ever having any reason to update the table of symbols by 'ar ts' or any other method on a copy of an archive ('.a') file for the sake of ld or make or anything else. Please clarify? -- ------------------------------- Disclaimer: The views contained herein are | dan levy | yvel nad | my own and are not at all those of my em- | an engihacker @ | ployer or the administrator of any computer | at&t computer systems division | upon which I may hack. | skokie, illinois | -------------------------------- Path: ..!{akgua,homxb,ihnp4,ltuxa,mvuxa, vax135}!ttrdc!ttrda!levy