On 10/20/18 4:18 AM, Romain Geissler wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to raise again the question of supporting -fuse-ld=ldd. A > patch implementing it was already submitted in > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-06/msg01722.html by Davide > Italiano. This patch still applies correctly to current trunk. I am CC-ing > the original author and re-posting it here unchanged for reference. > > I think we can consider this patch as relevant despite the goals and > licence difference of LLVM vs GNU, based on what was written by Mike Stump > in https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-07/msg00157.html > > Back then, the technical problem raised by lld was reported as > https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28414 now closed. In this bug, every > reported problems have been fixed except the last one. H.J. Lu mentions > this last problem (lld does not produces symbol versions predecessor > relationship while ld.bfd and ld.gold do, which seems to be a decision > taken on purpose and advertised as a harmless change) as being one reason > against supporting in -fuse-ld=ldd in gcc. Is it still the case today, and > if yes, why ? > > Is there any other reason why -fuse-ld=ldd shall not be supported by gcc ? > > Cheers, > Romain > > From 323c23d79c91d7dcee2f29b9ced8c1c00703d346 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Davide Italiano <dccitali...@gmail.com> > Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 20:51:53 -0700 > Subject: [PATCH] Driver: Add support for -fuse-ld=lld. > > * collect2.c (main): Support -fuse-ld=lld. > > * common.opt: Add fuse-ld=lld > > * doc/invoke.texi: Document -fuse-ld=lld > > * opts.c: Ignore -fuse-ld=lld THanks. Installed.
JEff
