Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: question about linker
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 18:42:01 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 47
Message-ID: <vjhrl9$3hm71$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vi54e9$3ie0o$1@dont-email.me> <vicfra$13nl4$1@dont-email.me>
 <20241129161517.000010b8@yahoo.com> <vicque$15ium$2@dont-email.me>
 <vid110$16hte$1@dont-email.me> <vifcll$1q9rj$1@dont-email.me>
 <vifiib$1s07p$1@dont-email.me> <viht27$2hgg1$3@dont-email.me>
 <vjb8e9$1973q$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vjc9k8$1jcad$1@dont-email.me>
 <vjeqf7$25lot$1@dont-email.me> <vjesfh$25rlj$1@dont-email.me>
 <vjev0k$2h167$1@dont-email.me> <vjf9b3$2si2m$1@dont-email.me>
 <vjfjvc$2uo0c$1@dont-email.me> <vjhfqi$1t69b$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <vjhncv$3g7n9$1@dont-email.me> <vjhqnq$3hg5b$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 18:42:02 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f0540cf273b21a8c1d582ae5f5d2a6e9";
	logging-data="3725537"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18bvmo65gwfC2Zch7XTJ0OvyZYM2+xfA1I="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qiwn26HBnCXOZ8/tt/16ZcMhpQ8=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vjhqnq$3hg5b$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3520

On 13/12/2024 18:26, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 13.12.2024 17:29, David Brown wrote:
>> On 13/12/2024 15:20, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>>> [...]
> 
> Since all I wanted is to know where you got your impression from,
> Waldek, my question is (yet) fully answered. - Thanks.
> 
> I'm also glad that David had already thoroughly replied to your
> post and I'm alleviated from that burden. As got obvious he read
> (and interpreted) the quoted statement in exactly the same way as
> I did. - Thanks as well.
> 
>> [...]
>>
>> (As an aside, who would ever compile gawk, other than the developers and
>> people building *nix distributions - who would all be using gcc or clang
>> for the job?  [...]
> 
> I'm a bit puzzled about that statement. - I certainly compile the
> GNU Awk source from the tar-file whenever I get my hands on a new
> version (including beta-test versions).
> 

Okay, I guess that answers my question - there /are/ some people who 
compile it from source on a regular basis.

But I suspect that for a tool like gawk, that would be rare - for most 
people who use gawk, it usually makes little difference if they use a 
version from last month or last century, so they will use whatever their 
distribution provides.  (I guess people who use source-based Linux 
distros will compile it on their own machine, but they too will 
generally use gcc or clang for that.)

You are clearly far more of a gawk user than I am - do you think many 
people actively (as distinct from, say, a general update on a 
source-based Linux distro) download the source and compile it themselves?

> I haven't looked into the package makefile but I suppose it will
> use the "cc" that is standard on my system (which is a 'gcc').
> 
> (It requires literally not more than a nett minute (to download &
> unpack & configure & make & install) on my old and rusty Linux box.)
> 
> Janis
>