Re: will this idea work?

[Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 12:09:27PM -0800, Po-yi Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> 
> >* Po-yi Wang <player@vcn.bc.ca> [2018-01-24 21:16:15 -0800]:
> >>the current version of musl (1.1.18), will no longer work with older
> >>binutils and gcc, specifically, the arm target. both i486 and ppc seem ok.
> >>i have checked older versions of musl, i guess some of them must have worked
> >>with gcc-3 binutils-1.15 before. suppose i try to port musl to work with
>  (binutils-2.15)(typo)
> >>older tools, specially gcc-3.4.5 and binutils-1.15. also assuming, only need
>  (binutils-2.15)(typo)
> >>to support older cpu and nothing new. i am guessing porting all the assembly
> >>files (*.s) would be sufficient?
> >
> >yes, porting the asm works, but note that the old
> >vfp intrinsics that work in binutils don't work in
> >llvm (complain to llvm folks) so it's not possible
> >to write asm such that every tool is happy, you
> >will need to do some ifdef clang hackery and i'm
> >not sure if the '.object_arch' directive works with
> >that old binutils.
> >
> i scanned through the musl mailing list archive, it seemed that
>  the minimum supported binutils version has been discussed before,
> around October 15, 2015. what is the current recommended
> gcc+binutils
> version that can support 486,armv5,ppc750?

In general, old versions of both binutils and gcc have lots of unfixed
bugs, and it's hard to assess completely whether musl will be
affected. Non-x86 platforms are much less tested in combination with
outdated tools. I would highly recommend against running binutils
versions much older than 2.20 or so, and ideally you should be using
2.25 or later.

Is there a reason you really want to use old versions?

Rich