On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 19:31, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> Update the toolchain definitions:
>
> - Delete the CLANG35 and CLANG38 toolchains, and replace CLANG38 with
> CLANGDWARF, updating it to support ARM and AARCH64 in addition to X64
> and IA32.
>
> - Remove GCC48 and GCC49.
>
> - Remove
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 13:28, Leif Lindholm wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 09:39:56 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > > - Remove GCC48 and GCC49.
> > >
> > > GCC49 is one GCC tool chain without LTO enable option. GCC5 is another
> > > GCC tool chain with LTO enable option.
> > >
> > > They
On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 09:39:56 +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > - Remove GCC48 and GCC49.
> >
> > GCC49 is one GCC tool chain without LTO enable option. GCC5 is another GCC
> > tool chain with LTO enable option.
> >
> > They have the different usage. I suggest to keep GCC49 and GCC5 both, and
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 12:22, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> On 3/28/23 12:12 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > What kind of errors are you seeing after adding -Wl,--no-pie,--no-relax ?
>
> I realized I didn't really try it after I thought you had said it was
> causing corruption.
>
> After adding those
On 3/28/23 12:12 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
What kind of errors are you seeing after adding -Wl,--no-pie,--no-relax ?
I realized I didn't really try it after I thought you had said it was
causing corruption.
After adding those flags I was able to verify (via "strace
--trace=process -f")
On 3/29/23 1:39 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
Could we perhaps do
GCC49 -> GCC
GCC5 -> GCCLTO
?
As with CLANG35/38, the GCCx names have become rather obsolete, so I'd
prefer to have a set of more generic names, and a sliding window of
supported versions that can be documented in
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 03:20, gaoliming via groups.io
wrote:
>
> Rebecca:
>
>
> > -邮件原件-
> > 发件人: devel@edk2.groups.io 代表 Rebecca Cran
> > 发送时间: 2023年3月29日 1:31
> > 收件人: devel@edk2.groups.io; Oliver Smith-Denny ;
> > Guomin Jiang ; Xiaoyu Lu ;
> > Jian J Wang ; Jiewen Yao ;
> > Ard
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 20:01, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> On 3/28/23 11:57 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> >
> > As I have indicated before, I am strongly in favor of these changes.
> > However, using LLD with X86 and GNU ld with ARM is not what I would
> > like to see here: not only is it a bad idea
On 3/28/23 11:57 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
As I have indicated before, I am strongly in favor of these changes.
However, using LLD with X86 and GNU ld with ARM is not what I would
like to see here: not only is it a bad idea for a single toolchain
definition to deviate in this manner between
Hi Rebecca,
Thanks for respining this.
On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 19:31, Rebecca Cran wrote:
>
> Update the toolchain definitions:
>
> - Delete the CLANG35 and CLANG38 toolchains, and replace CLANG38 with
> CLANGDWARF, updating it to support ARM and AARCH64 in addition to X64
> and IA32.
>
As I
10 matches
Mail list logo
