Re: HEADS UP binutils Gold Removed

On 8/26/26 12:11, Cy Schubert wrote:
> The binutils in our ports tree was the last binutils to support the Gold
> linker. A previous exp-run for 2.45.1 showed us that a number of ports
> failures were due to the missing linker.
> 
> I've decided to import binutils 2.47 into ports. I think the path forward
> is to address ports failures due do the removed feature.
> 
> Do we want to rename the current binutils to binutils244 and import 2.47 as
> binutils? Or would going "cold turkey" be advisable?
   Is there a public link for the exp run so we can see how many + what 
things break? How linkers work is a particular weakpoint for me so any 
examples of identifying and fixing some of the issues already?
   It sounds like the difference between 'cold turkey' and creating 
binutils244 will both break stuff unless either a default to use 244 for 
now is set or broken ports are patched to use it instead of the main 
binutils. Any problems with some ports using 2.47 and others using 2.44?
   Thank you for this work