Diego Novillo wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 15:40, Ollie Wild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
lto1 (even if -flto is not provided) and eventually we'll need to
support archives in the reader.
Will we? I thought one of the main justifications for implementing a
plugin architecture in the linker was to avoid having to do this in
collect2.
Well, it will likely be needed to support GNU ld. I'm assuming that
not everyone will use gold. Likewise, support for non-ELF
architectures may need to be added at some point.
I'm not really involved in the LTO stuff at all, but my recommendation
would be to severely de-emphasize any non-ELF targets -- to the point
where I'd say LTO is only supported on ELF targets.
Reality is there aren't too many non-ELF targets that matter anymore
and, IMHO, it's reasonable to demand ELF support for LTO. The only
other format that has a reasonable chance of working would be the COFF
variants anyway and the only COFF variant that is meaningful is used by
AIX (and perhaps Darwin?!?).
Just my $.02
Jeff
