Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:43:13 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: =?windows-1252?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ar and ranlib -D Message-ID: <257F4CC6-78AC-4729-B0F7-50FDA296D46D@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <86a9btuqh1.fsf@nine.des.no> References: <86eh15usv2.fsf@nine.des.no> <79CBA7AC-998E-46EE-8F94-F92C7C00FF75@bsdimp.com> <86a9btuqh1.fsf@nine.des.no>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:57 AM, Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> wrote: > Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> writes: >> My only concern is with the %POSIX section. That change isn’t needed >> for reproducible builds. > > Is it harmful? > > (what is that, anyway? It's not documented in make(1)) Short answer: It isn’t defined by POSIX 1003.2, so yes. POSIX mode, which is barely documented in the .POSIX target, causes make(1) to try hard to comply with POSIX requirements. Make, itself, winds up setting %POSIX to “1003.2” and not remaking the Makefiles. The global sys.mk system responds to this variable by only using commands defined by POSIX 1003.2, so it uses c89, instead of cc. It adds the dash to the ar command, and a bunch of other silly differences that are none-the-less mandated by POSIX. Since -D isn’t defined by POSIX ar, your change breaks that and so is harmful... Warnerhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?257F4CC6-78AC-4729-B0F7-50FDA296D46D>