This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
How feasible is it to port gold to mingw?
- From: Greatwolf <gmane dot greatwolf at mamber dot net>
- To: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 02:47:58 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: How feasible is it to port gold to mingw?
Hi all,
I've been using the mingw-gcc toolset for a while on windows and one of
the major aspects I really dislike is the build time needed to build
especially large projects. This is especially noticable during the
linking phase. This is a shame because this toolset performs very well in
other aspects like ansi conformance, quality of code generated etc.
I've been looking at ways to help speed the linking process up and gold
seems like a possible answer. The only problem is it doesn't support the
PE/Coff format needed on windows.
According to Ian Lance Taylor:
"gold is ELF only, and will never be ported to mingw, at least not as a
native linker. Sorry about that.
ELF (used on GNU/Linux, Solaris, and most free operating systems) and
PE/COFF (used on Windows) and Mach-O (used on MacOS X) are all quite
different. Writing a linker which works for all of them requires a number
of compromises, which is part of why the GNU linker is so comparatively
slow (the GNU linker does not support Mach-O, but it does support both
ELF and PE/COFF, among others). In order to maximize gold's performance,
I only focused on ELF."
So my questions are:
how feasible would it be to port gold over to windows assuming someone
is willing to take on this workload?
What part of the code base in gold would likely need to be modified?
How much work would need to be done? Doesn't need to be precise; I'm
looking for a ballpark figure here. eg. would 20%, 50%, or 80% of the
code need to be change due to platform specific details?
What sort of technical knowledge would one need to be able to perform
this task?
Thanks,
VicT