Re: HEADS UP binutils Gold Removed

On Wed, Aug 26, 2026 at 12:11:21PM -0700, 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?

Well, how many ports break ? If it's like 10 obscure leaf ports that are
dead upstream, going cold turkey can work, if it's like 100 or more with
more ports depending on them that won't be available any more, please
ask for an exp-run and fix them before updating.

-- 
Mathieu Arnold

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQITBAABCgB9FiEE9XJBpJetWizkEBUef2IOCp6dQb4FAmqQcZFfFIAAAAAALgAo
aXNzdWVyLWZwckBub3RhdGlvbnMub3BlbnBncC5maWZ0aGhvcnNlbWFuLm5ldEY1
NzI0MUE0OTdBRDVBMkNFNDEwMTUxRTdGNjIwRTBBOUU5RDQxQkUACgkQf2IOCp6d
Qb53ywwAknWRTIHOrGYC80PqFPz7esqYDSsNlJ85ZBK8KZ3Z044Ie23/lF9DbdcP
yt1lnqsYeWAIOGlANfGH1a3Q1Lkwrozk5m7Gol7mzGe+dVEy0QapSQt4IWWDbX9e
VPtud4dGYdH+ahZWD5NoBlFyYsQpmb3QmwIFFDs5PdxuTpa68mFogsEJcjtIXDID
88Ep7b8nuK1fDBZxfEmsh9NGXEXsVMhc1WNeHvrYCt45K4pPf9iDlgFv/RN1BAPa
0Z3wC5LsYJ8tljTgwC9F6rbtC5d9+JmyUyZ3JVvZ6PwhvcdByctPINrbwhHrqG/X
kp9lvXoKQgKUH1x0s8XyIXt6Z2x2jjX4Fq81Ud5J2e2p6PP8dsH9A+QEA/WwYBj4
bXpZUnMZOjAGIMno7U0sKj8PFm+IGg8YVo0y++wvOMldF/+w+ygnwXITVdLPxD8H
IMotb2vgqQ/9AOZ0/1u3BDdatNV2ljbq0GrQohyGle7Jaombq/I53AUKqVv+jAAU
4WbOaJ2N
=+baF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----