This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Reduce size of SymbianOS DLLs
On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 03:32:47PM +0000, Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-11-02 at 15:31, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > Hi Guys,
> > >>Well now that you mention it... elf32-arm.h is a header so that it can
> > >>be included by elfarm-nabi.c and elfarm-oabi.c. I haven't seen
> > >>indication of the "old, old" ABI being used in a long time. If I
> > >>remember right, you were talking about removing it.
> > >>
> > >>If there's no reason not to do that, we could move all the code from
> > >>elf32-arm.h and elfarm-nabi.c to elf32-arm.c (or just move it to
> > >>elfarm-nabi.c to avoid disrupting history). That's real simple.
> > >
> > >
> > > I would have thought all the 'interesting' history was in elf32-arm.h,
> > > which we'd loose anyway. So moving it all to elf32-arm.c would probably
> > > be the 'correct' move for consistency with other architectures.
> > I would definitely support the idea of obsoleting the "old, old ABI"
> > support. As far as I know there is nobody using it today, but I think
> > that we ought to do the proper thing and add the arm-*-oabi target to
> > the obsolete configurations section at the start of bfd/config.bfd.
> > Then, after the 2.16 release we can remove the old code and merge
> > elf32-arm.h and elfarm-nabi.c into elf32-arm.c.
> If we leave the existing elf32-arm.h around for backwards compatibility
> (with elfarm-oabi.c), then we could create a merged elf32-arm.c for
> current development work without the need to waste a lot of time testing
> that the new changes don't break the old code.
How about duplicating elf32-arm.h into both elfarm-oabi.c and
elfarm-nabi.c, and renaming the latter?
Speaking as a packager, I'd be really confused if I forward-ported a
binutils 2.15 patch to 2.16's elf32-arm.h, and discovered it didn't do