This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: forcing the linker to be a particular one (i.e. gold vs bfd)


On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> Vladimir Simonov <sv@sw.ru> writes:
>
>> Patch from Nick Clifton against gcc 4.4.x is here
>> http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/gcccvs/branches/sid/gcc-4.4/debian/patches/gold-and-ld.diff?view=log&pathrev=4512
>
> I didn't look at it in detail, but that patch looks more or less fine to
> me. ?Nick, have you sent it to gcc-patches? ?Do you want to?
>
>> PS Could you briefly explain why changes in gcc/collect2 are better than
>> ones in binutils?
>> I've mentioned pro and contras - switch in binutils decreases binutils
>> install size, leaves gcc untouched but adds additional "exec" during link
>> process. Additional "exec" outweighs?
>
> The gcc driver and collect2 are already set up to pick which linker to
> execute, and it's relatively easy to direct them to pick a different
> one. ?To me it makes sense to just take advantage of that fact.
>

I added --with-plugin-ld so that we can pick a different linker for
plugin at configure time since at that time GNU linker didn't support
plugin.  We should kill --with-plugin-ld and make it a run-time option
to select a linker for plugin and non-plugin.


-- 
H.J.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]