Page MenuHomeFreeBSD

Error on attempt to link amd64 with binutils 2.17.50 linker
ClosedPublic

Authored by emaste on May 10 2018, 3:19 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 29 2024, 4:24 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 28 2024, 6:26 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 22 2024, 7:45 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 20 2024, 9:14 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 20 2024, 8:42 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 19 2024, 11:01 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Sep 16 2024, 9:06 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Aug 20 2024, 4:52 PM
Subscribers

Details

Summary

We still need some binutils components so cannot include BINUTILS_BOOTSTRAP in BROKEN_OPTIONS. Add an explicit error rather than building a broken kernel.

Diff Detail

Lint
Lint Skipped
Unit
Tests Skipped

Event Timeline

emaste added inline comments.
Makefile.inc1
2094 ↗(On Diff #42364)

I could add && make(buildkernel), but I think it's reasonable to just disallow it; userland ifunc use will come too.

IMO it is more useful to check the ${LD} features, or at least the ${LD} version.

In D15378#324222, @kib wrote:

IMO it is more useful to check the ${LD} features, or at least the ${LD} version.

I agree. ifuncs is but the first thing... It would be good to know the features needed so that latter-day binutils can be used, but also flagged if we have a new one of these.

I don't think ${LINKER_FEATURES} here is right, because it will be the host's linker at this point. Let me see...

Add ifunc linker feature and test for it in kern.pre.mk in the amd64 case.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.May 10 2018, 3:43 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.