https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119691
--- Comment #4 from Sergey Fedorov <vital.had at gmail dot com> --- (In reply to Iain Sandoe from comment #2) > it's always been broken, unfortunately (for a start, it gets the range wrong) > At that stage, there were not many exes that were large enough to trigger an > issue.. > ... there are various hacks that fix the range - but still that is not > enough for exes if of significant size - like clang .... > > I have a fixed version of ld64 where the branch islands work properly. > @sergey > ld64-85.2.1 is borked > ld64-97.x is better but still limited > IFF my current published patched ld64 does not work for you - then I will > have to make some effort to publish the latest. I just wanna have the current release of gcc working on ppc64. (I do not see any point in 10.5 on ppc, since despite some claims which we heard, 10.6 is just better. However, 10.6 does not have ppc64 support.) I did have gcc11 building and working on 10.5 ppc64 2–3 years ago, but even if I can get it working again, that will be a huge step back, and undesirable mismatch in the toolchain. I am fairly sure I tried at least some of your Darwin-xtools releases in a hope that gonna solve the problem, but to no avail. What I am not sure, however, is whether I tried to build xtools as 32-bit execs and using those for 64-bit gcc. What is the advisable procedure? I do not really care if gcc itself is 32- or 64-bit, as long as it can produce 64-bit objects. Same goes for cctools and the linker. (It is a bit non-trivial to set up in MacPorts, since everything assumes consistent build_arch, however since I am not constrained by opinions of its upstream anymore, I can make it work in my fork.) AFAIU, there is a choice of a) whether to build a proper 64-bit gcc or b) gcc pretending to be 64-bit, but capable of compiling for ppc64 (this is how MacPorts did it with gcc7, it was never genuine 64-bit). And the same for cctools and ld64, though with some effort these can be built as FAT executables too. One nuance is that any LLVM that does not require C++11 cannot be built for ppc64, but it is possible to build llvm5 or llvm7 and use those. But I tried that with your llvm7, and for ppc64 it still failed. (On ppc it works nicely.) Which is more likely to work, given constraints we have?
