Re: USE_LLD=No vs. aarch64?

On Tue, May 28 2019, Christian Weisgerber <naddy@mips.inka.de> wrote:
> Jeremie Courreges-Anglas:
>
>> So far we only need this for one arch, maybe a cheaper approach would be
>> enough? The diff below just tests whether ld.bfd exists.
>
> On archs other than LLD_ARCHS, that diff would stat() ld.bfd every
> time bsd.port.mk is parsed.
>
> Let's do this only when USE_LLD switches to the non-default linker
> and check for either ld.bfd or ld.lld. Everything is already set
> up for this.
>
> OK?

That looks much nicer indeed. ok jca@

> Index: bsd.port.mk
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/infrastructure/mk/bsd.port.mk,v
> retrieving revision 1.1467
> diff -u -p -r1.1467 bsd.port.mk
> --- bsd.port.mk 20 May 2019 22:15:13 -0000 1.1467
> +++ bsd.port.mk 28 May 2019 10:45:52 -0000
> @@ -809,6 +809,11 @@ _NONDEFAULT_LD = Yes
> . endif
> .endif
> _NONDEFAULT_LD ?= No
> +.if ${_NONDEFAULT_LD:L} == "yes"
> +. if !exists(${_LD_PROGRAM})
> +IGNORE = "requires ${_LD_PROGRAM}"
> +. endif
> +.endif
>
> # setup locations of compilers from the base system or environment variables.
> # MODULES for compilers (gcc4.port.mk, clang.port.mk) also append to this,

--
jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE