Closed crrodriguez closed 11 years ago
I only have binutils 2.23.1 and gcc 4.7 to test this now. Please tell me exactly what options the gold linker accepts. The thing is, ld <= 2.23.1 is totally fine with --format=default so I wonder why upstream gold doesn't accept that. Could you tell me what command-line option gold requires? Is it --format=elf? Or does it require the correct elf64-x86-64 etc. line?
As a workaround, you can use --with-fonts=pango (that is, without "unifont").
Thanks David
using "elf" works just fine, results in a DSO with the correct elf64-x86-64.
the only accepted options are --format [elf,binary]
The old linker doesn't accept "elf" as format. I hate this already. Maybe I should drop that "--format=default" entirely and rely on gcc to pass the right format for all objects.
Any standard way to detect the gold linker in autoconf?
Ok, I actually didn't get autotools to use ld.gold but I tried it separately and the issue should be fixed with aeddc5b5528a6308db70b13c54dfae4c5d47cc1f. Can you give it a try?
Thanks! David
That should work, I will try it later, however I'm gonna talk to the gold people first, this looks like a bug to me as gold is supposed to be compatible with the old ld.
Fixed in gold HEAD --> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2013-03/msg00119.html
Thanks a lot for reporting this upstream. This does simplify things a lot, even though, the BFD architecture identifiers are still ugly to use in autotools.
Thanks! David
mod_unifont_la_LDFLAGS = \ $(AM_LDFLAGS) \ -module \ -avoid-version \ -Wl,-z,noexecstack \ -Wl,--format=binary -Wl,$(UNIFONT_BIN) -Wl,--format=default
-Wl,--format=default is invalid with the gold linker. (binutils 2.23.1/ gcc 4.8) you must pick between binary and elf.