https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20464
--- Comment #17 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2016-08-22 9:07 PM, amodra at gmail dot com wrote: > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20464 > > --- Comment #16 from Alan Modra <amodra at gmail dot com> --- > Ah, mips64 or s390x needed to be added to the target list. > > I think the part of HJ's patch that forces SYM64 archives due to the mere > presence of mips64 or s390x in the --enable-targets list ought to be reverted. That sounds like a good idea. After further consideration, it didn't seem right to break consistency with existing code due to the presence of mips64 or s390x in the --enable-targets list. > As far as I can tell, this won't break mips64 or s390x. If any 64-bit target > actually needs a 64-bit armap due to archive size exceeding 4G, then you'll > get > that. Also, note that binutils-2.25 and binutils-2.26 created archives with > 32-bit armaps for mips64 and s390x if plugins were enabled. Wouldn't this also be possible on 32-bit targets with large file support and why can't these targets support both armaps automatically? Dave -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ bug-binutils mailing list bug-binutils@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
