This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: RFC: Import zlib from GCC tree
- From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GDB <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>, Tristan Gingold <gingold at adacore dot com>, Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, Paul Koning <Paul_Koning at dell dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 07:23:36 -0400
- Subject: Re: RFC: Import zlib from GCC tree
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMe9rOp+5L0na923z1_jJQJuci=npuCQM6ktx7XG=gSOc1nZ+g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150314193105 dot GB5954 at adacore dot com> <CAMe9rOpGWwu57cKZW4M8QTYdicnDsDC5-G-t7sX4fQd3YhKP7A at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150316232444 dot GB3435 at adacore dot com> <CAMe9rOqQPEkvdTr8jjcy+yNaXTkTiRvceiRY_wnazRJe=rY8nQ at mail dot gmail dot com>
> >> I created users/hjl/zlib branch. It imported zlib into binutils-gdb tree
> >> and replaced --with-zlib with --with-system-zlib. Any feedbacks?
> > I'm not sure. Wouldn't some people want to configure --without-zlib?
> GCC doesn't support --without-zlib nor should binutils.
> zlib is needed to implement SHF_COMPRESSED.
Generally speaking, I really don't know what to think of that.
Some people might decide that this is a feature they do not want,
in which case having support for it is just extra bloat. But,
on the other hand, zlib is probably sufficiently small that
it would not matter much. Speaking for myself, at least, I can
live with that. Just not sure about others.
Given the lack of feedback so far, I am thinking no one is strenuously
objecting. I propose we give people another week to express their
opinion, after which we can move forward. You'll need the approval
of the binutils maintainers as well, I suspect.