Re: [dev] Some core tools

From: <>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 10:17:13 +0000

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:29:08AM +0100, Jens Staal wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 06:37:39PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
> > From a user perspective it has been a treat. I had issues with the GNU
> > M4 compiling on a embedded musl and PCC system but this M4 compiled
> > quick and clean. The only potential downside i can think of is it may
> > not be well maintained. last i checked the website there were no new
> > releases from when we tweaked the make file. There is another project
> > called elftoolchain which replaces binutils but i haven't tested it
> > yet.
> >
> This m4 variant is very portable. If I remember correctly I could
> compile it on Plan9/APE once (maybe with some modifications). Also, the
> elftoolchain is an interesting project but you never hear much about it
> and I guess the FreeBSD people are now moving to the LLVM
> variants/alternatives to binutils when applicable?

llvm is a massive c++ object oriented brain fuckage. It's so accute that we are
talking mental pathology here. This is a "by the book" "corporate-like"
fuckage. gcc is going amok (due to the same "corporate-like" sick people), but
the damage is order of magnitude less than with llvm.

The right answer from a suckless philosphy: have minimal binutils.
Something which does only and cleanly minimum ELF64 objects (maybe taylored
only for x86-64 and ARM64).
It seems that some people are trying to complex-ify ELF as much as they can
though, all for the wrong reasons, as usual (ELF symbol versioning...).

Received on Thu Feb 09 2017 - 11:17:13 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Feb 09 2017 - 11:24:14 CET