From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from d.mail.sonic.net (d.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.50]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B05663858D34 for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2020 19:20:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org B05663858D34 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=casner@acm.org Received: from auge (75-25-121-24.lightspeed.snvaca.sbcglobal.net [75.25.121.24]) (authenticated bits=0) by d.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id 05GJKOCv016665 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:20:24 -0700 Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 12:20:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Stephen Casner To: Alan Modra cc: binutils@sourceware.org Subject: Re: Plugin tests in ld testsuite In-Reply-To: <20200616030543.GC12881@bubble.grove.modra.org> Message-ID: References: <20200529031340.GH5475@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20200616030543.GC12881@bubble.grove.modra.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21.9999 (OSX 301 2018-08-15) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYD4vJ/ZtjrBDXdbZaPlwErOOI2NO2zNbi4osoaujKe+Kwy1kUAWQ0KBRh9th1ZUkiBXH9pkp39hb9bNtO5MWVi X-Sonic-ID: C;iFKXbQaw6hGMY7FOqzpn/A== M;Zg3HbQaw6hGMY7FOqzpn/A== X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_SOFTFAIL, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: binutils@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Binutils mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2020 19:20:29 -0000 On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Alan Modra wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 05:22:09PM -0700, Stephen Casner wrote: > > Should the pdp11-aout target be fixed to properly support plugins, or > > is there no point and it should just be configured to disable plugin > > support? > > I think you would be pioneering AOUT plugin support if you chose to > support plugins on pdp11. How much of a challenge do you enjoy? :-) I should have asked my question explicitly at the start of this thread and saved myself a bunch of time spent investigating how the test failed. I infer that there is no need to support plugins for pdp11. It looks like the proper fix is to unconfigure --enable-plugins so the tests are not attempted and to avoid creating invalid user expectations. The challenge I'm much more interested to work on (and was before being distracted by trying to get all the binutils tests cleaned up) is implementing ELF format for the pdp11 in gcc and binutils. With a couple of hacks I have that working to the extent of running a little C++ test program on the PDP11. -- Steve