On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:45:31AM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote: > > My previous attempt at using shell scripts for this > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg02471.html > > was not approved. Here's another attempt using wrappers written > > in C. It's only a single wrapper which just adds a --plugin > > argument before calling the respective binutils utilities. > > Thanks for doing this. How do they end up being used? I suppose > Makefiles will need to call gcc-ar then instead of ar? In which case > I wonder if ...
Basically you use make AR=gcc-ar RANLIB=gcc-ranlib NM=gcc-nm For most makefiles just specifying ar is enough. > > > The logic gcc.c uses to find the files is very complicated. I didn't > > try to replicate it 100% and left out some magic. I would be interested > > if this simple method works for everyone or if more code needs > > to be added. This only needs to support LTO supporting hosts of course. > > ;) > > ... using something like gcc --ar would be more convenient (as you That's essentially what the old proposal did (gcc -print-plugin-name) plus a wrapper. You can see the old discussion here http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-10/msg02471.html > can then trivially share the find-the-files logic)? Did you consider > factoring out the find-the-file logic to a shared file that you can re-use? I did this first (with collect2), but it was quite messy. Still have it as a branch. Then I settled on this simpler method which works for me at least. collect2 does not fully match what gcc.c does I think, so there's already some divergence. -Andi
