Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:24:26 -0500
From:      Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org>
To:        David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org>
Cc:        "freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>,  FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: GNU binutils 2.17.50 retirement planning
Message-ID:  <CAPyFy2BVTRmaprve3uZNQHaC=V%2BWKQju4g_gNu9Gi6H=4oWwqw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <42FDE8FB-67DF-4609-B5B7-988D93727DDA@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <CAPyFy2Dp6eAFmDGe1825BOmXNzpUDzj_iiDCSSR2S9rHv0bz6Q@mail.gmail.com> <42FDE8FB-67DF-4609-B5B7-988D93727DDA@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 07:52, David Chisnall <theraven@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
> We probably need to kill ld.bfd before 12.0.  It predates ifunc and so interprets anything with an ifunc as requiring a copy relocation.

I posted https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18340 to stop installing ld.bfd
when LLD_IS_LD is enabled. This will have the effect of removing
ld.bfd on amd64 (where ifuncs are in use) as well as other
architectures which do not yet use ifuncs, but this seems like a
reasonable step in the process of removing these obsolete tools.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPyFy2BVTRmaprve3uZNQHaC=V%2BWKQju4g_gNu9Gi6H=4oWwqw>