This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [Patch] skipping import libraries for performance reasons - direct auto-import of dll's


Ralf Habacker wrote:

Please separate policy arguments from functional arguments.  Whether
cygwin/mingw should drop import libs is policy.  Whether libtool should
use/create import libs is policy.  Whether ld should support auto-import
when doing "link-directly-to-dll" is functional.


Okay, you mean to separate the threads. The functional things at first and if
this works then the policy.
Let's talk about the first.

Sortof. policy discussions of import libs on cygwin belong on the cygwin list; ditto implibs on mingw --> mingw list. But not on binutils, and not crossposted.

Policy discussions about libtool handling of import libs on cygwin belong on the cygwin list, or the libtool list, or maybe both. But not on binutils.

Implementation of a new ld.exe feature for cygwin probably belongs on binutils or cygwin or maybe both, but in that case the discussion should be limited to that implementation -- and not drift off into the above policy issues.

Just being (pedantically) clear -- but it appears you already got this, since you dropped all discussion of the policy issues in your reply (although cgf ressurrected one of them; I'll follow up on that *policy* question in a reply limited to the appropriate lists).

My main point was that you didn't need to drag (possibly) contentious policy issues into the discussion; they'll just distract from the goal of merging a useful new feature/capability into binutils --- the feature is worthwhile regardless of any surrounding policy debates. Secondarily (and here we drift off into policy again), while I like the idea of your patch, and think it should probably be merged after some testing, that positive opinion on the implementation does not reflect agreement on the (definitely) contentious policy issues you raised. But we'll save that discussion for the appropriate lists, and the appropriate time (e.g. after the feature itself is merged).


However...

There does not seem to be any support in your patch for the most recent
auto-import capabilities

It supports this stuff.

Okkkaaayyy....I didn't really see that from perusing the patch. I'll have to run a bunch of checks and make sure none of my obscure test cases get broken by it. That'll have to wait until Thurs or Fri (vacation).

--Chuck


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]