https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21251
--- Comment #5 from Rainer Orth <ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE> --- Hi Nick, > Great - I have checked the patch in. excellent, thanks. >> Btw., do you have any idea how widespread the use of '=' for the sysroot >> prefix is? > > Hmm, I was going to say not a lot, but then I remembered that GCC uses it: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Directory-Options.html Maybe I'm blind, but where did you see that? I've also looked at GCC mainline invoke.text and found nothing, neither with -L nor anywhere sysroot is described. I'd have been surprised to find pure linker option descriptions repeated in the GCC manual, so I didn't even think to look. > So maybe it is more widespread than we realise. Which would be a pity ;-) >> Besides, while were at --sysroot, did you have a chance to have a look >> at PR ld/21250. > > I looked at it, shuddered, and looked away. :-} I suspect that that PR > will turn out to be a can of worms, so I was going to treat it as low > priority unless other people notice and complain too. Understood. It took me completely off guard since gcc's --sysroot support works just the way I expected (no headers found outside of the sysroot prefix), while gld may behave otherwise. This is particularly ugly if you're cross-linking for say a different OS version where the native libraries do work, but may contain more (or less) functions than desired for the target OS version. In a real cross environment, where host and target differ, you will get an error instead of links succeeding silently when they shouldn't... Rainer -- 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
