From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15156 invoked by alias); 19 Jan 2005 11:49:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13624 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2005 11:47:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 19 Jan 2005 11:47:39 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j0JBlYcm026163 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:47:39 -0500 Received: from talisman.cambridge.redhat.com (talisman.cambridge.redhat.com [172.16.18.81]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j0JBlSO12441; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 06:47:28 -0500 Received: from talisman.cambridge.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by talisman.cambridge.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j0JBlRYn003581; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:47:27 GMT Received: (from rsandifo@localhost) by talisman.cambridge.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.12.10/Submit) id j0JBlRdY003580; Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:47:27 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: talisman.cambridge.redhat.com: rsandifo set sender to rsandifo@redhat.com using -f To: Mark Mitchell Cc: binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: PATCH: --sysroot-suffix References: <20050117143236.GA21868@nevyn.them.org> <41EBE8C0.6070602@codesourcery.com> <20050118160622.GA12828@nevyn.them.org> <41ED4655.7090602@codesourcery.com> <20050119024459.GA1434@bubble.modra.org> From: Richard Sandiford Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:49:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20050119024459.GA1434@bubble.modra.org> (Alan Modra's message of "Wed, 19 Jan 2005 13:14:59 +1030") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00243.txt.bz2 Alan Modra writes: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 09:24:37AM -0800, Mark Mitchell wrote: >> In my patch, I rejected the scan over argv[] to look for the option >> because you will get fooled by something like "-L --sysroot". > > I'm happy enough with Richard's patch. If something like the above > becomes an issue, we can fix it by rewriting ld's arg parser. Thanks, patch installed. I realise the objections/potential problems that Daniel, Alex & Mark raised are good ones, and I will try to find time to make --sysroot a first-class citizen as far as option handling is concerned (including handling it in the normal getopt way). I can't promise anything soon though. Richard