[llvm-dev] [RFC] Adding a new option to lld to make it easy to maintain compatibility with other linkers

[James Y Knight via llvm-dev]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:20 PM Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 7:30 PM James Y Knight <jyknight at google.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe this will report an error on more command-lines than a
>> traditional linker would fail to link. E.g.:
>>   ld.lld foo.o A.a B.a A.a B.a
>> That "should" work fine if the libs are circularly-dependent, as long as
>> there's only a 1-level cycle. I've seen that sort of construct used a fair
>> amount, and while the start-group/end-group flags are pretty clearly a
>> superior option, but are not universally used.
>>
>
> Actually it won't report an error for that command line. We (and perhaps
> other linkers as well) don't do anything special for files that happen to
> be passed to a linker more than once, so the first A.a and second A.a are
> handled as different files.
>

But if B.a requires pulling in an object from A.a, LLD will pull it from
the _first_ A.a on the command-line, and then, if this flag is specified,
report an error due to the incorrect ordering of dependencies. (Whereas GNU
ld will pull it from the _second_ A.a and succeed linking.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180405/822c9158/attachment.html>