Re: [PATCH 04 of 10] binutils/binutils: add support for gold plugins

[Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar at gmail dot com>]

Hi,

As I've been paraphrased, let me answer.

On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Bill Pringlemeir <bpringle@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On ?2 Jan 2011, yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr wrote:
>
>> On Friday 31 December 2010 01:14:43 Arnaud Lacombe wrote:
>>>> +config BINUTILS_GOLD_PLUGINS
>
>>> This should be abstracted; gold is just a plug-in user. People may
>>> want to just enable binutils plugins' support for plugins without
>>> carrying about gold.
>
>> Do you mean that gold is not theonly binary utility that can use plugins?
>
> I think he meant gold support for plugins should not depend on LTO. ?You
> may want gold to have plugins for whatever...
>
s/gold/binutils/g; s/LTO/gold/;

>>> That said, someone wanting this will certainly
>>> not use ct-ng to build toolchains ...
>
>> That was mean. :-(
>
> If the above paraphrasing is true, then it makes some sense. ?If you are
> making some unknown plugin for gold, you will probably build binutils
> yourself; maybe not the whole toolchain though.
>
> Not trying to put words into anyone's mouth. ?That is just how I
> understand it which seems a somewhat rational issue with the patch (even
> if that isn't what Arnaud meant).
>
It was not.

 - Arnaud

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq