From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 240 invoked from network); 5 Jun 1997 19:27:42 -0000 Received: from euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (list@130.207.146.50) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Jun 1997 19:27:42 -0000 Received: (from list@localhost) by euclid.skiles.gatech.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA29005; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:18:51 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:18:51 -0400 (EDT) From: (Zoltan T. Hidvegi) Message-Id: <9706051922.AA16696@belgium.fishkill.ibm.com> Subject: Re: modules!?? In-Reply-To: <13453.199706051911@stone.dcs.warwick.ac.uk> from Zefram at "Jun 5, 97 08:11:30 pm" To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu (Zsh workers list) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:22:27 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31H (25)] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FXzzu.0.857.Q4nbp"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/3213 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu Zefram wrote: > >The nm output format varies from system to system, so it's probably hard to > >make it portable. And one should not have to have nm to compile zsh. But > >if we can automatize everything on Linux I'd be happy. > > There is one format for nm that is overwhelmingly common (BSD in origin, > perhaps?). A script could detect whether the local nm conforms to this > convention, and if so will have the capability to generate these symbol > lists. (As the GNU nm uses the popular format, I expect this will include > all of our usual development systems.) In case there isn't an appropriate > nm around, we'd have to include the symbol lists in the distribution. Of course AIX is always an exception )-:. Zoltan