On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 05:56:10PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:31:55AM -0500, Ed Maste wrote: > > We currently install and use at most three tools from GNU binutils > > 2.17.50, depending on target architecture: > > > > 1. as - assembler > > 2. ld - linker > > 3. objdump - diagnostic / information tool > > > > I hope to retire all use of these obsolete binutils before FreeBSD 13. > > Here I'd like to discuss objdump. It is a diagnostic tool that > > provides information about object files, binaries and libraries. It's > > not required as a bootstrap tool (i.e., not needed to build FreeBSD > > world or kernel). It is required to build a limited number of ports, > > and is used by some developers. > > > > I have a tracking PR for GNU objdump's retirement open in PR 229046. > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/229046. > > > > There are two ways we can proceed with its retirement: > > > > 1. Remove it without replacement. Ports that need objdump to build > > will have to depend on the binutils package/port, and users who wish > > to use it will have to install it. > > > > Related links for this path: > > Ports exp-run: https://bugs.freebsd.org/212319 > > Patch review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D7338 > > > > 2. Install llvm-objdump in its place (perhaps via a symlink). > > llvm-objdump is broadly compatible in both command-line argument > > parsing and output format, but there are many small differences and > > it's not a full drop-in replacement. > > > > Related links for this path: > > Patch review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18307 > > > > I am interested in feedback on the preferred approach. Installing > > llvm's objdump has the advantage that for most use cases everything > > will "just work", but may also introduce subtle failures. > > IMO no. 1 is preferrable because we do not need to track differences, nor > we need to explain them. Having to install binutils port is not a high cost, > and if somebody needs details about binary at the level provided by objdump, > including disassembler, she would need binutils port anyway.
I completly agree with kib here. Best regards, Bapt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
