Yes! I'm very interested in this as well! One piece of information to add: it might be worth investigating something more general like the configuration files used by ELLCC in controlling their cross-compilers.
This was somewhat recently discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2015-July/087907.html And looks like the most recent description of it is here: http://ellcc.org/blog/?p=13246 This would be rather useful in Nix for creating cross-compilers as well. AFAIK this isn't immediately suited to your needs but I think that it's the right direction to go and it'd be ideal to support both use-cases if we are talking about upstream support. ~Will On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:46 AM Nathan Froyd via cfe-dev < cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès via cfe-dev > <cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Shea Levy <s...@shealevy.com> skribis: > > > >> Your patches look good! My biggest concern is how the ld wrapper behaves > >> in the presence of response files. Have you tested that? > > > > It surely doesn’t (yet?). > > > > However, GCC does not pass “@file” arguments when it invokes ‘ld’, and > > the bug report you mentioned¹ talks about GHC invoking ‘gcc’, not ‘ld’, > > so I guess it’s fine to ignore response files in the ld wrapper. > > GCC will pass response files to ld when response files were used in > the invocation of GCC. > > -Nathan > _______________________________________________ > cfe-dev mailing list > cfe-...@lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev >
