> It's a bit binutils-centric isn't it? Can't we make it accept a > basename instead, so that any new or otherwise odd (ld.gold-2.25? lld? > mclinker?) linker can be used instead without modifying Clang.
*Sigh*. Apologies. I've just noticed this comes from GCC land, so we've probably got to follow for compatibility. After all, why would anyone want to use anything except the system-default ld.gold or ld.bfd, they're perfect! Tim. http://reviews.llvm.org/D4295 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
