On Thu, 1 Aug 2019 at 12:35, Ian Lepore <i...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Why would we provide no objdump? I use it quite frequently; it seems > like an essential part of the toolchain to me.
I don't want us to provide no objdump, but providing GNU objdump 2.17.50 indefinitely is not a viable option; see PR 218387[1] for an example of the kind of issue we have with providing obsolete software. We have a choice of: 1. provide llvm-objdump, and no /usr/bin/objdump in the base system 2. install llvm-objdump as /usr/bin/objdump 3. require that users who want an objdump install the binutils port /usr/bin/objdump is not required by the base system build and not required by most ports. exp-run details with no /usr/bin/objdump can be found in PR 212319[2], and PR 229046[3] is a tracking PR for removing dependencies on objdump. Option 1 (removing /usr/bin/objdump) is proposed in review D7338[4] while option 2 is (installing llvm-objdump as objdump) is proposed in review D18307. llvm-objdump is roughly compatible with GNU objdump (command line and output format) but there are a large number of small issues that will likely trip up scripted or automated objdump use. (Scripts should probably just use readelf instead, though.) D18307 has a list of LLVM bug reports for known issues in llvm-objdump. Note also that we currently provide only two or three obsolete binutils, depending on the CPU architecture: - as - ld - objdump [1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/218387 [2] https://bugs.freebsd.org/212319 [3] https://bugs.freebsd.org/229046 [4] https://reviews.freebsd.org/D7338 [5] https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18307 _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"