[PATCH] D33726: [driver][netbsd] Build and pass `-L` arguments to the linker

[Rui Ueyama via cfe-commits]

I don't remember the details, but I believe LLD-generated executables are
fine with either Linux or on NetBSD

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54 at gmx.com> wrote:

> On 08.06.2017 22:39, Rui Ueyama wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 6:55 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via Phabricator
> > <reviews at reviews.llvm.org <mailto:reviews at reviews.llvm.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     joerg added a comment.
> >
> >     In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33726#774105
> >     <https://reviews.llvm.org/D33726#774105>, @ruiu wrote:
> >
> >     > I'm totally against adding per-OS path knowledge to our linker.
> Compilers already know include paths and I don't want to maintain another
> list of paths in the linker. Also this can be more confusing than useful
> when you are doing cross-linking.
> >
> >
> >     The only reason for compilers to maintain that list is for finding
> >     crt*.o. They otherwise don't care about the library paths at all.
> >     There is no confusion for cross-linking as long as proper sysroot
> >     support is used. Which we have been doing on NetBSD for ages.
> >
> >
> > That's not what clang is trying to do for all Unix-like systems (except
> > NetBSD due to the bug), right? The compiler driver actually passes
> > library paths to the linker. If you think that is wrong, you should make
> > a change to stop doing that on all systems. I don't see a reason to not
> > do this only on NetBSD.
> >
>
> I'm convinced that Joerg is right, that there is need some knowledge on
> the LLD side. I'm more relaxed about -L paths as long as they work for
> regular use-cases, but DT_RPATH vs DT_RUNPATH behaves differently on
> Linux and NetBSD.
>
> >     > For all OSes other than NetBSD, LLD works fine with the clang
> driver as the driver passes include paths to the linker. I don't see any
> reason not to do the same thing for NetBSD. That stands even if the linker
> has to have a list of include paths.
> >
> >     Sorry, but this is again ignorant and wrong. The very same problem
> >     of build systems calling ld directly apply on most other systems.
> >     Even then, the list of linker paths is not the only OS-specific
> >     knowledge. Things like the DT_RPATH vs DT_RUNPATH mess, init vs
> >     init_array all belong into this category. The list goes on.
> >
> >
> >     Repository:
> >       rL LLVM
> >
> >     https://reviews.llvm.org/D33726 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D33726>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20170608/0b56b96d/attachment.html>