This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] gold: enable new dtags by default

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:12:21PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 January 2013 22:42:17 Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:02:31PM -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > patch 1/2 doesn't change any defaults ... just adds a new flag
> > > 
> > > Understood.  I only want to add that flag to gold if it is added to
> > > GNU ld.  That is, I am deferring the decision about the flag to the
> > > other binutils maintainers.
> > 
> > On further thinking about this, I'd be happy with changing the
> > existing flag, --enable-new-dtags, to have the behaviour proposed for
> > --enable-new-dtags-only.  As Mike said, the "new" dtags have been
> > around for a mighty long time, and emitting both old and new tags was
> > really only for backward compatibility.  Is anyone running a system
> > with a 14 year old glibc?  If there is, do they also want the latest
> > binutils?
> i'm happy with that course.

OK, consider it approved.

>  the new -only flag was merely to keep from rocking 
> the boat.


> how do you feel about also enabling --enable-new-dtags by default in ld.bfd ?

I'm not so comfortable with this.  After all, the new dtags do have
slightly different meaning to the old ones.  I think it would be
better to leave the default as is.

Alan Modra
Australia Development Lab, IBM

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]