On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 03:16:54PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > > > On 7/10/17 3:07 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:35:26PM +0100, Phil Blundell wrote: > >> On Mon, 2017-07-10 at 17:09 -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 02:00:35PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>> On 7/10/17 1:47 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 04:36:42PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Khem, et al, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I couldn't find below patch being discussed on this mailing > >>>>>> list before it got > >>>>>> merged: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/OSSystems/meta-browser/commit/62e323848f569c > >>>>>> 4cdea5567b1917ce006d7705af > >>>>> > >>>>> https://github.com/OSSystems/meta-browser/commit/55a74501bc65c90c > >>>>> 86e3236b51ec2dc2fc0145fb > >>>>> > >>>>> "ld-is-gold just means that my default linker is gold, however we > >>>>> build > >>>>> both linkers, so one should be able to enable gold just for > >>>>> linking > >>>>> chromium even if default ld is bfd linker." > >>>>> > >>>>> I strongly disagree with such interpretation - this would mean > >>>>> there's NO way > >>>>> to disable gold linker completely, e.g. for when external > >>>>> toolchain doesn't > >>>>> support it. > >>> > >>> Copying OE architecture list for further discussion of "ld-is-gold" > >>> meaning. > >> > >> The attribution above is a bit confusing so I'm not quite sure who > >> wrote what. But it is certainly true that "ld-is-gold" in > >> DISTRO_FEATURES means, and always has meant, simply that gold is to be > >> installed as the default linker. In other words, if you invoke plain > >> "ld", you will get gold, and if you need the BFD linker - usually > >> because you are using linker scripts that gold doesn't understand - > >> then you must invoke ld.bfd. See > >> 207a9013670560d62c793a66f01e19f4760a71a8 from some six years ago for > >> the place that it was originally added. > >> > >> As far as I know, we do not have (and never have had) any > >> DISTRO_FEATURE that will inhibit gold from being installed altogether, > > > > It is not about being installed, but about being supported by the toolchain > > in use - think of external toolchains not built by OE-Core... The original > > question was whether it's appropriate to force gold linker in recipes, if > > ld-is-gold is not set by the distro. > > We do not have a set API for external toolchains, and thats also wy > external toolchains have to contantly adjust with newer OE release. > however, in this case external toolchains could provide ld.gold that > symlinks to bfd linker
That is true, yes. Which also reminds me to submit a report to Linaro about this gold linker breakage... > >> nor can I immediately think of a reason why this would be generally > >> useful. Obviously, any DISTRO that wants to do this is welcome to > >> provide a bbappend for binutils. > >> > >> p. > >> > -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
