[Bug gold/16808] New: ld.gold doesn't know about -Ofast
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16808 Bug ID: 16808 Summary: ld.gold doesn't know about -Ofast Product: binutils Version: 2.24 Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: gold Assignee: ian at airs dot com Reporter: quequotion at mailinator dot com CC: ccoutant at google dot com This error broke complation of systemd-git from AUR: /usr/bin/ld.gold: fatal error: -Ofast: invalid option value (expected an integer): fast The man page for ld.gold says: -O LEVEL, -optimize LEVEL Optimize output file size Without specification of what qualifies for LEVEL, one must assume it means the same as the compiler levels (-O, -O1, -O2, -Os, -O3, -Ofast). I have compiled the same package without this problem in the past, so this might be a regression (not sure if or when binutils may have been upgraded). -- 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
[Bug gold/16808] ld.gold doesn't know about -Ofast
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16808 --- Comment #1 from quequotion at mailinator dot com --- The manpage for ld says: -O level If level is a numeric values greater than zero ld optimizes the output. This might take significantly longer and therefore probably should only be enabled for the final binary. At the moment this option only affects ELF shared library generation. Future releases of the linker may make more use of this option. Also currently there is no difference in the linker's behaviour for different non-zero values of this option. Again this may change with future releases. Is the same true for ld.gold? In which case -O, -Os, -Og, -Ofast are not implemented and -O1 = -O2 = -O3 = -O4 and so on? -- 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
[Bug gold/16808] ld.gold doesn't know about -Ofast
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16808 --- Comment #2 from Que Quotion --- Changed this option in LDFLAGS from -Ofast to -O4 and compilation proceeds as normal. -- 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
[Bug gold/16808] ld.gold doesn't know about -Ofast
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16808 --- Comment #5 from Que Quotion --- Marking my own bug invalid. This was a misunderstanding. Somehow I'd gotten away with feeding the linker flags like -Ofast before, but had I read the documentation I might have realized this doesn't make sense. Thanks! -- 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
