in 2.20.51.05 the configure arguments passed to build both gold and ld changed. instead of "--enable-gold=both --enable-linker=bfd" it now works like # Handle --enable-gold. # --enable-gold Build only gold, gold is default # --disable-gold [default] Build only GNU ld, GNU ld is default # --enable-gold=both Build both gold and GNU ld, gold is default # --enable-gold=both/gold Same # --enable-gold=both/bfd Build both gold and GNU ld, GNU ld is # default the code changed enough that the grep in toolchain-binutils.eclass doesn't match anything now and we end up passing just --enable-gold, meaning we don't build the bfd linker anymore. btw, is there a reason enabling USE=gold still sets the default linker to bfd? don't want the bug reports?
Created attachment 216870 [details, diff] toolchain-binutils.eclass.diff
why dont we drop USE=gold and always build bfd/gold by default. and drop support for older versions that support only one.
ive committed a change along those lines: http://sources.gentoo.org/eclass/toolchain-binutils.eclass?r1=1.88&r2=1.89
How about reverting this until there is a non hard masked version in the tree that can be used?
no. current stable/unstable does not allow parallel installs and gold breaks many packages. current stable/unstable also has many bugs we arent fixing.
Ok, fair enough. Is there any version that is reasonably safe among the 51 series?
i havent noticed any problems on x86_64 with binutils-2.20.51.0.9+