https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116410
--- Comment #13 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jan Hubicka from comment #11) > > We plan to adopt -ffat-lto-objects ourselves soon for at least a subset of > > packages, so this was good timing. :) > Note that -ffat-lto-objects has various issues, especially with library > archives. The problem is that fat LTO object has two symbol tables (one > ELF and one LTO) but ar and other utilities does not handle this and > will pick one of the two symbol tables. In the case the symbol LTO and > non-LTO symbol tables diverge, surprises happens. OK, so we should only do it with care & selectively for packages which must install static libraries (like flex). > HJ had binutils patch solving this, but AFAIK it was not merged in. > H.J., can I help with this at all? > Honza Thanks honza for the advice
