On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Steven Bosscher <stevenb....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 9:26 PM, Richard Guenther > <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> No, gold should choose a single prevailing definition. The issue is that >> gold and the linker-plugin seem to be unmaintained. > > Looking at the binutils list, there seems to be a lot of gold patching > going on. Why do you believe it is unmaintained?
I meant that the combination of LTO + gold/-fuse-linker-plugin is unmaintained. Nobody is actively looking at bugreports with that combination. > For the plugin: is this not covered in the test suite (and if that's > the problem, then what can we do about it)? The testsuite does not cover -fuse-linker-plugin at all - it lacks at least a feature test for it (not all configurations support it). Thus, it's not unfortunately possible to write a testcase excercising the -fuse-linker-plugin path. I'm somewhat uncomfortable that we have the two paths into LTO, by using collect2 or the linker plugin. Unfortunately the linker-plugin is currently the only path that supports LTOing static libs. As soon as that issue is solved we should IMHO remove the linker-plugin path again. Richard.
