This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: Import zlib from GCC tree
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, 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: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 06:17:51 -0700
- 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> <20150314071803 dot GW877 at vapier>
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2015 09:32, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 6:14 AM, Joel Brobecker wrote:
>> >> >> Sorry I didn't realize that we only put zlib in gcc tree, not in
>> >> >> binutils+gdb tree.
>> >> >> Will copy it over from gcc tree work?
>> >> >
>> >> > I think it would. But distro vendors might want to have an option
>> >> > to be able to build with the system zlib.
>> >>
>> >> That is why --with-system-zlib is here.
>> >
>> > At first sight, and at the technical level, this seem to provide
>> > the tools needed to support builds with zlib.
>>
>> I am working on SHF_COMPRESSED support:
>>
>> http://www.sco.com/developers/gabi/latest/ch4.sheader.html
>>
>> I'd like to import zlib from GCC source tree. Any objections?
>
> makes sense to me as long --with-system-zlib and --{with,without}-zlib continue
> to work fine. i.e. a follow up change to make zlib required for bfd/gdb/etc...
> would not be desirable imo.
The whole ideal of adding zlib is to make zlib always available.
--with-system-zlib will be supported, just like gcc, nothing more.
--
H.J.