Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 17:18:25 -0300 From: Renato Botelho <garga@FreeBSD.org> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Retiring GNU objdump 2.17.50 Message-ID: <eff01af7-9521-fb66-aad0-54bca54e33fc@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20200109155610.GA23031@kib.kiev.ua> References: <CAPyFy2CJYYkcBRkajEf9miGUDBgpJ-DU3kGuJyHf5u%2BhjrF4uw@mail.gmail.com> <20200109155610.GA23031@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/01/20 12:56, 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. +1 -- Renato Botelho
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?eff01af7-9521-fb66-aad0-54bca54e33fc>