Skip ld/lto tests if plugins is disabled for binutils?

[Bin.Cheng]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 8:59 PM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 04:21:55PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Alan Modra <amodra@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 02:26:19PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >> I found there are some FAIL ld test cases with message like "sorry -
>> >> this program has been built without plugin support", and the program
>> >> in this case is ar.  I think it's because I configured/built binutils
>> >> without "--enable-plugins", the question is:
>> >> should we skip these kind of tests if plugins isn't enabled?
>> >
>> > Actually the real question is why are we enabling plugins for ld
>> > but not ar?
>>
>> Thanks Alan, is it possible for binutils to have different plugin
>> enabling for sub-programs?
>
> In ld/configure.ac we have:
>
> # 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])
>
> So ld plugin support is always enabled, even when you configure with
> --disable-plugins.  That seems wrong to me.

Hi Alan, I searched around and found out that there was bug report on
this before at https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12402

It was resolved as invalid and said this is designed behavior, though
I am not convinced.
With this, the only choice is to enable-plugin for binutils?

Thanks,
bin
>
> --
> Alan Modra
> Australia Development Lab, IBM