Date: Tue, 04 Nov 1997 02:37:35 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Ian Vaudrey <i.vaudrey@cableinet.co.uk> Cc: "'ports@freebsd.org'" <ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Ranlib Message-ID: <8360.878639855@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 04 Nov 1997 08:59:06 GMT." <01BCE901.22C66E00@nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I can see why it was requested, but in some cases it really is a pain. > Please, please, please add an override flag. After all, I thought it > was part of the Unix philosophy to allow me to shoot myself in the foot > whenever I want :) Understood. :-) Let me look into that. > -t Set the modification time of the __.SYMDEF file. Some loaders > (but not the FreeBSD one) compared this time with the modifica- > tion time of the archive to verify that the table is up-to-date > with respect to the archive. If the modification time has been > changed without any change to the archive (for example, by a > cp(1)), the -t option can be used to ``touch'' the modification > time so that it appears that the table is up-to-date. This is > also useful after using the -t option of make(1). > > So it looks like the @exec ranlib line should really be @exec ranlib -t, > but for FreeBSD it is *not* really needed anyway? Is that correct? Looks like it to me! I think we can just nuke those @exec ranlib lines as unnecessary waste, and perhaps portlint can even be extended to look for it. :) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8360.878639855>