Am 21.11.2010 um 13:33 schrieb Blue Swirl:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:15 AM, Segher Boessenkool segher@kernel.crashing.org wrote:
Sounds to me like the real problem is with how ar is used, then? Can you show the ar commands that fail?
Oh I see now. ar doesn't store pathname.
If you can require a new enough binutils (2.19 or newer), you could use "thin archives", which don't have this limitation, and have some more advantages. See the -T option to ar (ar rcsT bla.a ...)
Another option is to have an archive file per directory.
The object files could be renamed before archiving, or GCC -o target could be different from what simple %o: %.c substitution rule would generate.
But googling for the project finds very few references, most of them are OpenBIOS. This seems to be the source: http://ftp.penguinppc.org/users/hasi/ It's stale, but I found it here: http://www.koders.com/info.aspx?c=ProjectInfo&pid=XDR5GKGZPX43N13RGPC3DV... in the project hfsplusutils. Linux fs/hfsplus seems to be very different.
So I think renaming would be the easiest solution, in the unlikely event that hfsplusutils project revives we can still pretty easily refresh.
Agreed.
The patch once again is line-wrapped [1] unfortunately. It would be nice if you could push such patches to your http://repo.or.cz/w/openbios.git repository (or wherever) for testing.
Andreas
[1] http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2010-November/005823.html