[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Bug ld/21251] Support $SYSROOT in ld -L and INPUT command

From: ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Subject: [Bug ld/21251] Support $SYSROOT in ld -L and INPUT command
Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 12:49:13 +0000


--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> ---
Hi Nick,

> Great - I have checked the patch in.

excellent, thanks.

>> Btw., do you have any idea how widespread the use of '=' for the sysroot
>> prefix is?
> Hmm, I was going to say not a lot, but then I remembered that GCC uses it:
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Directory-Options.html

Maybe I'm blind, but where did you see that?  I've also looked at GCC
mainline invoke.text and found nothing, neither with -L nor anywhere
sysroot is described.

I'd have been surprised to find pure linker option descriptions repeated
in the GCC manual, so I didn't even think to look.

> So maybe it is more widespread than we realise.

Which would be a pity ;-)

>> Besides, while were at --sysroot, did you have a chance to have a look
>> at PR ld/21250.
> I looked at it, shuddered, and looked away. :-}  I suspect that that PR
> will turn out to be a can of worms, so I was going to treat it as low 
> priority unless other people notice and complain too.

Understood.  It took me completely off guard since gcc's --sysroot
support works just the way I expected (no headers found outside of the
sysroot prefix), while gld may behave otherwise.  This is particularly
ugly if you're cross-linking for say a different OS version where the
native libraries do work, but may contain more (or less) functions than
desired for the target OS version.  In a real cross environment, where
host and target differ, you will get an error instead of links
succeeding silently when they shouldn't...


You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]