Hi Tim, AFAIK, the naming convention is something like "ld."+name, e.g.
* ld.bfd for BFD linker * ld.gold for Gold * ld.mcld for MCLinker Thus, it won't be the problem for these linkers. Although, I am not sure about lld. Alternatively, I can slightly extend this option to search both the given name and "ld."+name. However, I am not sure whether this is a good idea or not. Sincerely, Logan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 2:20 AM, Tim Northover <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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
