I'm in favor. The current disparate use of linkers overly complicates the build scripts, and given that BFD seems to be a liability, I think it makes sense to transition. In the interest of full disclosure, I don't fully understand all the implications of this change, especially on x86.
- Will > On May 13, 2016, at 6:50 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool via swift-dev > <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > On ARM targets, gold is already required due to a certain bugs in the > handling of relocations for those targets. > > For other targets, there was a bug exposed in the BFD linker (which is > believed to have been fixed in a newer release). > > Recently, another change seems to have exposed yet another issue with linking > on x86 targets. > > Given the frequency with which issues occurring with the BFD linker, is it > reasonable to say that building swift requires the gold linker? To the > previous three issues, I believe that two of them were worked around with the > approach of using gold. So, there is some precedent to that approach. > Furthermore, this idea has been brought up before. > > Im hoping that this can spark a thread which can come up to some conclusion > to whether it is reasonable to expect that the linux builds would use gold > for the foreseeable future. > > -- > Saleem Abdulrasool > compnerd (at) compnerd (dot) org > _______________________________________________ > swift-dev mailing list > swift-dev@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev _______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
