From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Thu Jan 9 16:15:19 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4CF91F291C for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 16:15:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Received: from outbound3d.ore.mailhop.org (outbound3d.ore.mailhop.org [54.186.57.195]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47trn3435lz4Lgj for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 16:15:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1578586517; cv=none; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; b=qFZGFVFwz1HbKdHnX/lG7r1TRdFEuCB5ib62VipWzlaP/QtuXoyWe/McxCMjJxvdEr8jzK2ojxHG8 IYDeLt3t6k/+Lcxu5MC5cbXVaKB1ceOSuDjRuvW8Ay8ZlU1lFbMFpqZpsIyjYo2S3L0Nds7+Wm5hK2 EzfFjm5bRfbI2SOWzicyO870DwlhO4GgFqufdc/p6qVVxDPuadwenRcKHBzgDcmWzoPS2yPwwi4YB0 1O419kbpj/dMrRYX0lw67CBCuLTg90RmbKmzjkaaEiytpXUlrAgAFuUcJgGpdKxo9ce5UscbOCtmQm JuOcwPI0BQN8lOraYjKjyPcUQjCmqsg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=arc-outbound20181012; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:content-type:references:in-reply-to: date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:dkim-signature:from; bh=s6UvBaOJzG3Tq13tN1M+s0gLCXty+6I2wq7+JOuuh1Y=; b=h7jgyupoaSg6gFIwAelGAQEknLYehTm+aDBOYCVpmAGnCpthqwbVmDc44VgXIgjD4kAj9vTryhbWl Hf4hreNxno2vtARXCMayzeQhKKakQ8OwN/G5mjGbUk/XSFxFpkkXGEuFBKLICBTKq7W8EDnTgrom/K gWHQNGUFW4SQNtLZxlHGlIl+t/f3L6Cmimb02/l1wP14bh95fWjVBqJAlWUza/hcD2w8ChheqqNhWa 2p05m8ybD0oP/ixliA8xcU8eabEde/vgCFMso+0P+TsUXUD/lYp6P5vkpXyv91Pf8yT3X1Zk2PQ06i oLqVvTd/tEsIUUW9RwrTFl/G20wF82w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; outbound3.ore.mailhop.org; spf=softfail smtp.mailfrom=freebsd.org smtp.remote-ip=67.177.211.60; dmarc=none header.from=freebsd.org; arc=none header.oldest-pass=0; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outbound.mailhop.org; s=dkim-high; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:content-type:references:in-reply-to: date:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:from; bh=s6UvBaOJzG3Tq13tN1M+s0gLCXty+6I2wq7+JOuuh1Y=; b=rZ1xIPnBKPPC7Ao1vOeUhgdKvNmyojzFzLgfeDqURNF1pvDR2PZQe1BuN8AI5dzbV31PRpD6zWo5k jDhmc7J/JUsIywTAdC5jzosOfZUuaVb/9QrtDKxrXGnqxIUJqHljrLLXWv9Wjc+w2rEZ6s3jT+0P2A cuvOpi3och0z7JY5CUZEYIAZ3e9aCpJhah4hnjtV/wooTLKhO27pHPxivSfqRiamlK6yS5kNUQRPQI lYZfuwkjmTMFbjKJtAX1qJB2CzT8ekTrgxHyua9bfj/vz/u/5sKEyQceLPrMOGLvJ+8mqoEvS0SDkV 0YcaKE2fJvXixburtIf2rwxXb0ciXeg== X-MHO-RoutePath: aGlwcGll X-MHO-User: 38769e04-32fb-11ea-b80d-052b4a66b6b2 X-Report-Abuse-To: https://support.duocircle.com/support/solutions/articles/5000540958-duocircle-standard-smtp-abuse-information X-Originating-IP: 67.177.211.60 X-Mail-Handler: DuoCircle Outbound SMTP Received: from ilsoft.org (unknown [67.177.211.60]) by outbound3.ore.mailhop.org (Halon) with ESMTPSA id 38769e04-32fb-11ea-b80d-052b4a66b6b2; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 16:15:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rev (rev [172.22.42.240]) by ilsoft.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 009GFFdK040097; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 09:15:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <54d1f23bd455269cf33a296e2f95809f21f3341c.camel@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Retiring GNU objdump 2.17.50 From: Ian Lepore To: Konstantin Belousov , Ed Maste Cc: FreeBSD Ports , freebsd-arch Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:15:15 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200109155610.GA23031@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20200109155610.GA23031@kib.kiev.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ASCII" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 FreeBSD GNOME Team Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47trn3435lz4Lgj X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.97 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.97)[-0.975,0]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.994,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:16509, ipnet:54.186.0.0/15, country:US] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 16:15:19 -0000 On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 17:56 +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 10:31:55AM -0500, Ed Maste wrote: > > We currently install and use at most three tools from GNU binutils > > 2.17.50, depending on target architecture: > > > > 1. as - assembler > > 2. ld - linker > > 3. objdump - diagnostic / information tool > > > > I hope to retire all use of these obsolete binutils before FreeBSD 13. > > Here I'd like to discuss objdump. It is a diagnostic tool that > > provides information about object files, binaries and libraries. It's > > not required as a bootstrap tool (i.e., not needed to build FreeBSD > > world or kernel). It is required to build a limited number of ports, > > and is used by some developers. > > > > I have a tracking PR for GNU objdump's retirement open in PR 229046. > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/229046. > > > > There are two ways we can proceed with its retirement: > > > > 1. Remove it without replacement. Ports that need objdump to build > > will have to depend on the binutils package/port, and users who wish > > to use it will have to install it. > > > > Related links for this path: > > Ports exp-run: https://bugs.freebsd.org/212319 > > Patch review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D7338 > > > > 2. Install llvm-objdump in its place (perhaps via a symlink). > > llvm-objdump is broadly compatible in both command-line argument > > parsing and output format, but there are many small differences and > > it's not a full drop-in replacement. > > > > Related links for this path: > > Patch review: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18307 > > > > I am interested in feedback on the preferred approach. Installing > > llvm's objdump has the advantage that for most use cases everything > > will "just work", but may also introduce subtle failures. > > IMO no. 1 is preferrable because we do not need to track differences, nor > we need to explain them. Having to install binutils port is not a high cost, > and if somebody needs details about binary at the level provided by objdump, > including disassembler, she would need binutils port anyway. I completely disagree with this. I recently tested llvm-objdump and found it to be completely compatible with all the ways I normally use objdump, and objdump is a tool I use multiple times every month. I have no idea what you mean about needing to install binutils port "if somebody needs details...". Objdump is the one and only tool I need for examining object files and executables. I have no idea what other tools you might even be talking about that are part of a binutils port. I do agree with the idea that objdump is more useful to a developer than to the average user or sysadmin. I wouldn't object to something like a WITH_LLVM_OBJDUMP knob that defaulted to off. -- Ian