Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 23:01:32 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 214864] [exp-run] test build with lld as /usr/bin/ld Message-ID: <bug-214864-13-O8oJYP9rZq@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-214864-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-214864-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D214864 Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|emaste@freebsd.org |portmgr@FreeBSD.org --- Comment #22 from Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> --- (In reply to Jan Beich from comment #21) > Would slapping LDFLAGS_clang+=3D-fuse-ld=3Dbfd against the few offenders = an > acceptable fix? I think that would work, but two points: - We'd want to just set LDFLAGS+=3D-fuse-ld=3Dbfd -- the same issue will ap= ply to any ports that build with GCC - We don't want to hardcode the explicit -fuse-ld=3Dbfd in individual ports; Baptiste proposed a LLD_UNSAFE=3Dyes flag that the ports infrastructure will automatically turn into that (in addition to setting LD etc.) portmgr: now that Clang/LLVM/LLD 5.0.0 has arrived in HEAD can you rerun the exp-run? There are a number of improvements that may fix some of these issu= es, and those that remain will be dealt with via the LLD_UNSAFE or equivalent. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-214864-13-O8oJYP9rZq>