This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
RFC: Update top level libtool files
- From: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- To: binutils at sourceware dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 12:45:07 +0100
- Subject: RFC: Update top level libtool files
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx04.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=nickc at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 80C3E8047F
Hi Guys,
I would like to update the top level libtool files (libtool.m4,
ltoptions.m4, ltsugar.m4, ltversion.m4 and lt~obsolete.m4) used by
gcc, gdb and binutils. Currently we have version 2.2.7a installed in
the source trees and I would like to switch to the latest official
version: 2.4.6.
The motivation for doing this is an attempt to reduce the number of
patches being carried round by the Fedora binutils releases.
Currently one of the patches there is to fix a bug in the 2.2.7a
libtool which causes it to select /lib and /usr/lib as the system
library search paths even for 64-bit hosts. Rather than just bring
this patch into the sources however, I thought that it would be better
to upgrade to the latest official libtool release and use that
instead.
I have successfully run an x86_64 gcc bootstrap, built and tested lots
of different binutils configurations, and built and run an x86_64 gdb.
One thing that worries me though, is why hasn't this been done before?
Ie is there a special reason for staying with the old 2.2.7a libtool ?
If not, then does anyone object to my upgrading the gcc, gdb and
binutils mainline sources ?
Cheers
Nick