I was unable to disable ld plugin support on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. GCC lto/plugin support is currently broken on this target. It seems the stuff in config/plugins.m4 is overridden by the dlopen stuff in configure.in: # Check for dlopen support and enable plugins if possible. enable_plugins=yes AC_CHECK_HEADER([dlfcn.h],[],[enable_plugins=no],[AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT]) AC_SEARCH_LIBS([dlopen],[dl],[],[enable_plugins=no],[]) AC_CHECK_FUNCS([dlopen dlsym dlclose],[],[enable_plugins=no]) # We also support plugins on Windows (MinGW). if test x$enable_plugins = xno ; then AC_CHECK_HEADERS([Windows.h],[enable_plugins=yes],[],[AC_INCLUDES_DEFAULT]) fi AM_CONDITIONAL([ENABLE_PLUGINS], [test x$enable_plugins = xyes])
(In reply to comment #0) > I was unable to disable ld plugin support on hppa-unknown-linux-gnu. The --enable/--disable-plugins option is part of binutils/configure and decides only whether nm and ar have plugin support. There is no way to disable ld plugin support (plugins.m4 is not even included by ld/configure.in; the code you quoted is more of a replacement than an override). This is by design - or to be precise, by review; I originally submitted a patch that did have configure-time control over whether the plugin interface was supported, but during the code review on the mailing list, I was persuaded to make it unconditional. (I can't remember exactly why we decided that, but it's all there in the archives.) > GCC lto/plugin support is currently broken on this target. Is there else anything apart from GCC PR47274, which I'm looking at?
> > GCC lto/plugin support is currently broken on this target. > > Is there else anything apart from GCC PR47274, which I'm looking at? There's about three hundred GCC lto/plugin fails. There's a couple of PRs. It's hard to tell whether they are all the same bug or not. Dave
(In reply to comment #2) > > > GCC lto/plugin support is currently broken on this target. > > > > Is there else anything apart from GCC PR47274, which I'm looking at? > > There's about three hundred GCC lto/plugin fails. There's a couple > of PRs. Can you quote the PR numbers please? I couldn't figure out which ones you meant from a quick bit of searching.
> > > Is there else anything apart from GCC PR47274, which I'm looking at? > > > > There's about three hundred GCC lto/plugin fails. There's a couple > > of PRs. > > Can you quote the PR numbers please? I couldn't figure out which ones you > meant from a quick bit of searching. The other one is GCC PR47827. Dave