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: Contributing FreeBSD/aarch64 support

Thanks for taking a look Andrew.

I wasn't specifically looking for review on these changes yet (they
admittedly have a few rough edges), but rather the meta issue of
whether a collection of trivial or nearly trivial changes like this
can be accepted without paperwork.

On the issues you raised:

On 8 February 2015 at 23:12, Andrew Pinski <> wrote:
> Modifying configure directly is not a good idea.

Yes, this is just an artifact of the history of this change; most
recently it existed as a patch in our ports tree, applied to the
binutils tarball after extraction.  I just applied that patch as-is to
my tree.

>  Also if you need
> -Wno-uninitialized, it might make sense to figure out better patches
> for those places where unitialized warnings happen.

Will do.

> And having -Wno-unused-function seems wrong no matter what.  It might
> mean you need some extra #if/#endif around some code which not used
> for freebsd.

It looks like the flag was added due to warnings for
set_error_{kind,message}, which are unused on any platform.  Perhaps
GCC does not warn about unused static inline functions.

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