Long symbol names on pdp-11's

[utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!unix-wizards]

>From CSVAX.william at Berkeley Tue Nov 10 05:40:58 1981
At one time some people here thought of moving the 4.1 symbol table
arrangement to 2.8bsd, but decided not to for some good reasons:

1)Broad scope of changes: All compilers, assemblers, debuggers, essentially
anything that looks at a executable needs changing. Which means lots of
crucial programs broken for the developement time.

2) Nonstandard: Its hard to keep old/new format files on the same system.
Essentially you need a flag day, which is what happened with the VAX here.
It took three or four of them to get it straight.

Even more difficult is the fact that there are mounds of ancient version 6
OBJECTS that people are STILL using (no source!). This I found out when people
objected to text overlays because they couldn't recompile the source. This is'nt
a problem yet with the VAX.

3) Usage problems: Some programs break because they go over size limits
when you add the larger symbol table routines. Others need serious reworking
because they relied on `magic' numbers and formats.

4) Incomplete definition still: Sdb and related programs still
have trouble because there still is'nt enough information in the symbol table,
even after the change to 4.1 . Thus at some future date someone might insist
on another different format. 

***********************
It really sounds like a nice idea, but probably useful if you are porting
UNIX to a new machine where you will not have a heritage to compete with.

	Bill Jolitz.