Subject: Re: Reworking the .o suffices in our Makefiles
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Luke Mewburn <lukem@NetBSD.org>
Date: 10/22/2004 12:01:54
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:13:04PM -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
| Personally, I'd go with:
| > no
| as in, no compelling reason to do it (that i'm aware of 8-).
We want to separate
.so as PIC object component of a shared library
.so as a shared library
to simplify building of dlopen-able objects that aren't named
"libfoo.so". (This is a separate issue I'm working on).
So, even without moving the former (PIC object) to .lo, I'd like
to seriously consider moving it to another non-.so suffix.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----