Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:11:29 +0100 From: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav <des@des.no>, Kai Wang <kaiw@freebsd.org>, Joseph Koshy <jkoshy@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] ar(1) front-end committed. (notes for cross compile) Message-ID: <47C1C161.10107@bsdforen.de> In-Reply-To: <20080224190637.GB18096@team.vega.ru> References: <20080221173150.GA93693@dragon.NUXI.org> <20080222070728.GA56282@team.vega.ru> <20080222091642.GB57428@team.vega.ru> <864pc1s1wa.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20080222105239.GC94607@team.vega.ru> <86abltqjiz.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20080222124617.GA16580@team.vega.ru> <86wsoxp2ob.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20080223201808.GB65540@team.vega.ru> <20080224180433.GA21162@dragon.NUXI.org> <20080224190637.GB18096@team.vega.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 10:04:33AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:18:08PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: >>> now bootstrap BSD ar on systems >700044, and that we call >>> GNU ar/ranlib with the "g" prefix instead of "gnu-". >> Why are you going against my preferences for "gnu-" - if I liked "g" >> I would have done it that way in my patch. >> > The reasoning for the "g" prefix sounded sane to me. > Anyway, I don't want to argue about this point, and > will leave it to you to decide (I've reverted to the > "gnu-" prefix). I'd prefer the g-prefix. It's commonly used, just thing gmake, gawk and similar stuff.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47C1C161.10107>