On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 4:37 AM Burton, Ross <ross.bur...@intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 20 Dec 2018 at 01:20, Khem Raj <raj.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > That however leads to the question of should we just change the > > > defaults? Does anything break if we use gcc-ar instead of ar? > > > > Dont think that is a good idea in general since gcc-ar is a wrapper > > around normal ar > > passing --plugin=/path/to/lto/plugin/so and that may not be right > > thing to do always. > > Well, I built core-image-sato core-image-weston with AR=gcc-ar > RANLIB=gcc-ranlib globally and it worked fine.
Please build a lot more. These images cover only handful of recipes there are problems like https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=77576 which we might have to contend. > > As we build the cross gcc we know what is in it. Other toolchains be > they clang, ICC, or external GCCs, can override AR just like they do > the other variables. > Yes they can, but what doe this buy us ? except we make Core toolchain gcc dependent one step more. > Ross -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
