On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 02:15:46PM -0400, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Aug 31, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > >Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>Does anyone disagree (and if not, have suggestions how to address this > >>in GCC)? > > > >ranlib is basically never required on a modern system. It is really > >only needed if the archive is built with the S option to ar. > > > >So I think the best way to address this is to not run ranlib. > > If you consider Darwin "modern", then that statement is not correct > as moving/copying an archive on darwin, requires ranlib to be run.
I suppose RANLIB could point to a script that checks for a readonly archive, and if found, make it writable, run ranlib, then restore the mode. It's a kludge, true, but it might get the job done.
