Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 15:30:08 -0700 From: Mark Millard <marklmi26-fbsd@yahoo.com> To: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: amd64-binutils file name structure for utils vs. for powerpc64-binutils and aarch64-binutils Message-ID: <D9BAEC2B-AED4-4031-8B60-658660DBCF28@yahoo.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
For: # pkg info "*binutils" aarch64-binutils-2.30_2,1 amd64-binutils-2.30_2,1 binutils-2.30_2,1 powerpc64-binutils-2.30_2,1 # svnlite info /usr/ports/ | grep "Re[plv]" Relative URL: ^/head Repository Root: svn://svn.freebsd.org/ports Repository UUID: 35697150-7ecd-e111-bb59-0022644237b5 Revision: 466704 Last Changed Rev: 466704 in a amd64 context . . . amd64-binutils uses file naming that does not match the patterns that aarch64-binutils and powerpc64-binutils use. Using an example type of binutil for illustration (in a 12.0 head context): # find /usr/local/bin /usr/local/*freebsd* -name "*addr2line*" -print /usr/local/bin/powerpc64-unknown-freebsd12.0-addr2line /usr/local/bin/x86_64-freebsd-addr2line /usr/local/bin/addr2line /usr/local/bin/aarch64-unknown-freebsd12.0-addr2line The differences involve the lack of: -unknown 12.0 (Of course, plain binutils does not have such conventions.) Is this expected/intended? For reference: # uname -apKU FreeBSD FBSDFSSD 12.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT r332181M amd64 = amd64 1200061 1200061 =3D=3D=3D Mark Millard marklmi26-fbsd at yahoo.com ( dsl-only.net went away in early 2018-Mar)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?D9BAEC2B-AED4-4031-8B60-658660DBCF28>