Re: Any plans to integrate just binutils‑gdb into GCC?

[unlvsur unlvsur]

the problem is that doing so requires modifying both gcc and binutils. binutils does not provide a lot of tool (such as dlltool) for x86_64-w64-mingw32, unlike llvm all tools are available.

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>

________________________________
From: Arsen Arsenović <aarsenovic@baylibre.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2026 6:16:55 PM
To: unlvsur unlvsur <unlvsur@live.com>
Cc: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>; gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>; binutils@sourceware.org <binutils@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: Any plans to integrate just binutils‑gdb into GCC?

unlvsur unlvsur via Gcc-help <gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

> LLVM/Clang generates LLVM IR, not necessarily object files. Also thin
> lto works very well for clang and llvm while for GCC to use lto, the
> compilation is extremely slow to the point of useless.

No it isn't. GCC LTO is applied widely. My entire system is built with
GCC + -flto.

> BTW, supporting --sysroot --target does not mean $target-gcc couldn't exist any more for those legacy systems. It is just for new system, we should move to just gcc --target --sysroot, not $cross-gcc

Patches welcome.
--
Arsen Arsenović

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/attachments/20260723/c0147ae2/attachment-0001.htm>