> On 8 Nov 2016, at 13:39, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Nov 8, 2016, at 1:05 PM, Iain Sandoe <iain_san...@mentor.com> wrote: >> >> Simple for the simple case is already part of my patch, but capability for >> the expert and non-simple case is also present, > > I'm trying to ask a specific question, what does the patch allow that can't > be done otherwise? Kinda a trivial question, and I don't see any answer. > > I'm not looking for, it allows it to work, or it makes the expert case work. > I'm look for the specific question, and the specific information you want, > and why ld -v doesn't get it.
ld -v gets it when you can execute ld. It doesn’t get it when the $host ld is not executable on $build. Providing the option to give the version allows that without requiring the complexity of other (possibly valid) solutions. If you know that you’re building (my patched) ld64-253.9 for powerpc-darwin9 (crossed from x86-64-darwin14) it’s easy, just put —with-ld64=253.9 .. I think we’ve debated this enough - I’m OK with keeping my extra facility locally and will resubmit the patch with it removed in due course, Iain > > For example, there is a host you are thinking of, there is a build system > you are think of, there is a target you are thinking of. There is a set of > software you have, likely a particular Xcode release. There are binaries > that you might have built up for it, there might be headers you grab from > some place, libraries or SDKs from another place. This might be done for > quick debugging a darwin problem on a linux host, but without the full > ability to generate a tool chain, it might be to support a full tool chain. > > I want it to work, without specifying the it, doesn't let me see what problem > you are solving. > > I read through the PR listed, and it seems to just list a typical > x86_64-apple-darwin12.6.0 native port. That really isn't rocket science is > it? I mean, we see the wanting from the build tools directly. So, the > change isn't to support that, is it? >
