[PATCH 2/2] bfd: Remove bfd_arch_l1om and bfd_arch_k1om

[H.J. Lu]

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 7:28 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On 25.03.2022 15:22, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 1:21 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 24.03.2022 20:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> Remove bfd_arch_l1om and bfd_arch_k1om since L1OM/K1OM support has been
> >>> removed from gas, ld and opcodes.
> >>
> >> As said in a post-commit-message comment of the patch removing support
> >> from ld/, I'd prefer to keep e.g. elfedit functioning for these targets.
> >
> > elfedit doesn't need bfd_arch_l1om nor bfd_arch_k1om.
>
> Oh, okay. (I didn't check how it actually works internally.)
>
> >> Maybe not necessarily for the input, but at least for the output. Else
> >> there's no way for people to create such objects anymore, forcing them
> >> to resort to hex-editing of files, which I view as undesirable. I think
> >> this 2nd patch goes against that; I'm not sure in how far the 1st one
> >> would still allow this to function.
> >
> > People can use the older binutils.
>
> Hmm, well, yes, that's possible, but not very nice. But according to
> your reply further up I take it that it'll continue to function anyway?

We have removed L1OM/K1OM support from ld, gas and objdump.
What else do we support L1OM/K1OM?

-- 
H.J.