Re: Question about libraries and object files!
From: Razvan (mihai11_at_mailcity.com)
Date: 1 Sep 2003 14:50:48 -0700
Your questions are not bad questions, but they are something you
can easily answer for yourself by simply reading the man pages
for the various commands that you ask about, plus the man pages
for various other related commands listed at the end of each of
those man pages.
Maybe, but since it is all new to me I was thinking to ask somebody
who knows those kind of issues very wel. This
approach will save time later. If the basic informations on the
subject are confirmed, then I won't be asking myself all
the time if the first conclusions that I have been able to draw on the
subject are good or no.
It isn't obvious that you have a functional Linux system yet, so
it might be that your access to the man pages is not as easy as
it could be.
I have installed a Slackware distro with the latest version of man
One is a "tape archive", that was originally meant to save
multiple files to a tape. The intend was mass storage for file
system backup. The other is intended to archive binary object
files used in program development.
To my knowledge 'tar' is based on ar. Since everybody has abandoned
'ar' as an archiver I was wondering why it was
still kept for this purpose.
'Ar' was developped with the same intentions as tar; it was not meant
from the beginning to be used in program dev.
As for the 'binary' stuff... it is pretty obvious that both archivers
can handle binary files. In fact all
archivers should do it.
>It is compatible with other tools that are used for that purpose too,
such as the linker
>which can retrieve individual modules from the libraries produced by
That is my only answer too: others tools know "ar" 's format, while
they don't know "tar" 's format. Since tar
is a replacement for ar it must have some advantages over it. Ar was
kept for this job because of compatibility issues and
because it is good enough for the job.