ia64 obsolescence

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

Hi Alan!

On 2/8/21 7:31 AM, Alan Modra wrote:
> I had hoped that someone who cared about ia64 would look into why ld
> is segfaulting, and perhaps even fix the fails.

The problem from my side is that I am not an expert with binutils. I'm
a port maintainer in Debian, so my knowledge is spread across the different
fields (toolchain, kernel, plumberland etc) rather than understanding
the linker on a very low level.

> As far as I know,
> that hasn't happened.  So, before removing ia64 support I had a look
> myself, and found that reverting commit db41f6eb5234 cures all the
> segfaults and looks to be good overall:
> +FAIL: PR ld/22269
> +FAIL: PR ld/22269 (-z dynamic-undefined-weak)
> -FAIL: Build rdynamic-1
> -FAIL: Build dynamic-1
> -FAIL: visibility (hidden_weak)
> -FAIL: visibility (hidden_weak) (PIC main)
> -FAIL: visibility (protected_weak)
> -FAIL: visibility (protected_weak) (PIC main)
> -FAIL: weak hidden symbol DSO first
> 
> What I'd like from those of you who objected to removing ia64, is a
> better evaluation of reverting the bad commit.  Native ia64 gcc and
> glibc testresult differences, for example.  Alternatively, Jim's
> blessing of the revert.  That might be enough to get ia64 off the
> obsolete list.

I can provide these test results. Can you give me a patch against 2.35.1
which is the current version of binutils we have in unstable.

I will then build and compile gcc and glibc with and without the patched
binutils version.

Thanks,
Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913