On 10/05/2018 02:18 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > Add a configure knob for mingw32 and 64 toolchains to default passing > --large-address-aware to the linker, when creating 32-bit binaries. > -Wl,--disable-large-address-aware can still reverse its effects. > > I've tested this with cross i686-pc-mingw32-gcc and > x86_64-w64-mingw64-gcc (is this the usual triplet name?), observing the > flags passed by gcc to the linker when asked to create an executable > program or a dynamic library, in 32- or, with the latter compiler, in > 64-bit mode. > > > I wonder if it makes any sense to extend/rename the configure flag to > apply to cygwin as well, though it should default to enabled for that > platform. > > I also wonder if it makes sense, at this point, for mingw to default to > --large-address-aware (I guess not, but it doesn't hurt to ask, does it? > :-) > > Yet another idea that comes to mind is to introduce gcc flags, say > -m32full and -m31, to imply -m32 and also pass either > --large-address-aware or --disable-large-address-aware, respectively, to > the linker. > > I suppose it might also make sense to approach this issue from the > linker, rather than from GCC, enabling its default to be configured. > Would that be preferred? I thought tweaking GCC would be better, for > the flag would be visible with -v, both the one passed to the linker and > the one passed to GCC configure. It wouldn't be quite as visible as a > linker configuration knob. > > > Given all this, is this patch below ok to install, or should I make > changes. I've included the configure and config.in changes because > they're small enough. > > Below this first patch, I enclose another patch for cygming.h. >
They're both OK as far as I can see. I just don't like the configure name implying all 32bit pointers are used by userspace. Perhaps just --enable-large-address-aware? Be sure to also update the documentation as Joseph says.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
