> Will WANT_AOUT be considered a supported option?
If I can get it to work.
> That is, if I choose to build a.out libraries, will I be giving up the
> right to gripe when `make world' breaks, and be resigned to the ranks
> of the NOCLEAN masses?
At this time (well... you will know when you tim
> I have just changed made a change concerning the building of legacy a.out
> bits during `make world'.
> Previous to my change, one would define "NOAOUT" to keep from building
> the legacy a.out bits. Now one would define "WANT_AOUT" to build them.
> The default of building a.out bits gets in the
> > Previous to my change, one would define "NOAOUT" to keep from building
> > the legacy a.out bits. Now one would define "WANT_AOUT" to build them.
> Does this mean that new systems will no longer run a.out binaries?
No.
> Or will the libraries no longer be built?
Yes.
> Will the existi
On Monday, 29 March 1999 at 3:02:28 -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> I have just changed made a change concerning the building of legacy a.out
> bits during `make world'.
>
> Previous to my change, one would define "NOAOUT" to keep from building
> the legacy a.out bits. Now one would define "WANT_AO
I have just changed made a change concerning the building of legacy a.out
bits during `make world'.
Previous to my change, one would define "NOAOUT" to keep from building
the legacy a.out bits. Now one would define "WANT_AOUT" to build them.
The default of building a.out bits gets in the way of
