This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [RFD] New binutil 'objsplit'
- From: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "E. Weddington" <eric at ecentral dot com>
- Cc: <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 13:32:29 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFD] New binutil 'objsplit'
- References: <408680F8.21416.61CB22A1@localhost>
"E. Weddington" <eric@ecentral.com> writes:
> On 21 Apr 2004 at 12:12, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
>>> Well, for purposes of building libgcc.a, it would be *so* much simpler
>> if it could be boiled down to
>>
>> ./xgcc -B./ -ffunction-sections -yada -yada libgcc2.c
>> ar cr --split-object libgcc.a libgcc2.o
>>
>> or similar. But this would require us to (a) support
>> -ffunction-sections on all targets, and (b) require binutils on all
>> targets, neither of which things will ever happen
>
> I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with the arguments for either of these.
>
> Could you explain a little further, why not (a),
GCC supports several object file formats (such as a.out) that cannot
handle -ffunction-sections.
> and if GCC is now requiring GNU Make, why not, *at some point in the
> future*, (b)?
binutils doesn't support all the targets that gcc supports; it would
be a tremendous amount of work to get complete parity; you hedge this
with your 'at some point in the future' but I don't see it happening
within five years.
zw