Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!mailrus!ncar!tank!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: IEEE 1003.2
Message-ID: <14946@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: 12 Dec 88 00:16:52 GMT
References: <9137@smoke.BRL.MIL> <33251@think.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 20

>In article <9137@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>>They even had to debate whether "ar" should be usable with non-object
>>module files! ...

In article <33251@think.UUCP> barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin) writes:
>... the point is not whether "ar" CAN be usable with non-object module
>files, but whether it MUST be usable with them.  Sounds like they are
>requiring "ar" to be enough to create object libraries, not a
>general-purpose archiving utility.

For that matter, why do we need object archives in the first place?
They are just a hack to save space (and perhaps, but not necessarily,
time).  How about /lib/libc/*.o?

(About 1/2 :-) ---the file system is *supposed* to be clean enough and
fast enough to support this sort of thing; why *are* we working against
it?)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris