From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Jan 23 04:58:39 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id EAA13576 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 04:58:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA13559 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 04:58:33 -0800 (PST) Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id GAA25304; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 06:00:10 -0700 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 06:00:10 -0700 From: Nate Williams Message-Id: <199601231300.GAA25304@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Thomas Graichen Cc: nate@sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), wes@intele.net, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GNU binutils and FreeBSD 2.1.0 In-Reply-To: <199601230809.JAA15849@dirac.physik.fu-berlin.de> References: <199601210031.RAA18804@rocky.sri.MT.net> <199601230809.JAA15849@dirac.physik.fu-berlin.de> Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk > > > I tried to build binutils 2.6 today, but I can't get 'ld' to configure > > > correctly for 'i386-unknown-freebsd2.1.0'. Has anyone else built > > > binutils for 2.1? Any hints or helps? > > > > The ld in FreeBSD (and NetBSD) is a heavily hacked old version of GNU > > ld. The current GNU binutils would need *serious* hacking to get the > > same functionality, so the shlib stuff the *BSDs are not supported (and > > probably will never be) in any official version of GNU's binutils. > > would'nt it be possible to try to fold all these "hacks" back into the FSF > distribution ? - this would make it much easier to keep up to date with the > binutils or build cross-compile environments I doubt that the FSF would take some of them since they've diverged so much, but if you have the time to do the work you're more than willing to give it a shot. Nate