This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Saturday 03 May 2008, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Sat, May 03, 2008 at 06:40:47PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > It is not a problem per se but it is a lot of work all together. > > > > Is not including a trivial patch worth breaking ld just to force > > people to use gcc to link? Why not go all out and remove the linker > > scripts alltogether so it won't work without gcc at all? :) > > > > I would rather have people use gcc to link because it is the right > > thing to do instead of forcing them because we will break ld with > > multiarch. > > Linking with ld has been broken for all those years on plenty of > platforms. Just not on x86 Linux. and will continue to be broken. i think the mutlilib example i pointed out recently in a different thread is a good one ... an ld that supports a wide range of bfd's cannot automatically select the right bfd based on the input objects. people who execute ld have to explicitly specify the emulation with -m or it'll fail right off the bat. that's worse than adding random search paths i'd think ... -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |