From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 1 19:08:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5396316A412 for ; Sat, 1 Jul 2006 19:08:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from aldan.algebra.com (aldan.algebra.com [216.254.65.224]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B34043D7E for ; Sat, 1 Jul 2006 19:08:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from aldan.algebra.com (aldan [127.0.0.1]) by aldan.algebra.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k61J8SJx015476 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Jul 2006 15:08:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by aldan.algebra.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/Submit) id k61J8RIk015475; Sat, 1 Jul 2006 15:08:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com) From: Mikhail Teterin To: Peter Jeremy Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 15:08:27 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200607010009.09231@aldan> <20060701115508.GC8447@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <20060701115508.GC8447@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> X-Face: %UW#n0|w>ydeGt/b@1-.UFP=K^~-:0f#O:D7whJ5G_<5143Bb3kOIs9XpX+"V+~$adGP:J|SLieM31VIhqXeLBli" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 03:44:03 +0000 Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: weird limitation on the system's binutils X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 19:08:37 -0000 On Saturday 01 July 2006 07:55, Peter Jeremy wrote: = IMHO, the FreeBSD base system should provide tools for doing native = development - anything beyond that belongs in ports. šGiven that = binutils supports quite an extensive range of targets (of the order of = 100), building them all is impractical and a waste of resources for = virtually everyone who uses FreeBSD. I would agree with this myself, except that anything in the ports would have to _duplicate_ or replace the system one. All of it -- not even just bfd -- because it is all linked statically. The overhead of even a 100 extra "bfd vectors" for all is much smaller, than the the full duplication overhead for those, who want to disassemble an "obscure" object format -- or even one from another FreeBSD platform. We support multiple human languages, each one needed by relatively few people. > My reading of contrib/binutils suggests that files for targets not > related to FreeBSD are in the exclude/delete list and aren't imported > into the FreeBSD repository. They are all here, although there are a lot fewer than 100 of them: echo /usr/src/contrib/binutils/bfd/*-* | wc -w 74 > libbdf.a is built by /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/libbfd/Makefile. > That should be a fairly simple change to arrange for it to build and > install the .so as well. Installing both libbfd-s certainly would be a good start... As things stand, every port needing it -- including various different compilers -- builds it own version. This is, largely, explained by the GNU's stupidity of bundling a different version with each tool (gdb, compiler), but the bundled bfds are not THAT incompatible, and the system-installed version can include the compatible superset... -mi