This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [EXT] Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
To: Romain Geissler <romain dot geissler at amadeus dot com>
Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, Andi Kleen <ak at linux dot intel dot com>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 10:30:31 +0200
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
References: <alpine.LSU.2.20.1907171350160.51264@ncerndobedev5004.etv.nce.amadeus.net> <87ftn4in6x.fsf@linux.intel.com> <71c86eab-4178-e841-f968-b4425f851dd3@redhat.com> <87ftn3z5fz.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <alpine.LSU.2.20.1907182251050.48467@ncerndobedev5004.etv.nce.amadeus.net>

* Romain Geissler:

> That may fly in the open source world, however I expect some vendors
> shipping proprietary code might be fine with assembly/LTO
> representation of their product, but not source.

They can't ship LTO today anyway due to the format incompatibility, so
that's not really an argument against source-based LTO.

Thanks,
Florian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [EXT] Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Richard Biener

References:
- Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Romain Geissler
- Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Andi Kleen
- Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Jeff Law
- Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [EXT] Re: Can LTO minor version be updated in backward compatible way ?
  - From: Romain Geissler

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]