[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 |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21251
--- 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...
Rainer
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.