Re: [PATCH] alpha, ld: remove -taso option

[Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>]

Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@unseen.parts> writes:

> The -taso switch was quite useful 25 years ago for porting 32-bit
> code with broken integer-pointer casting. Not anymore. The EF_ALPHA_32BIT
> support is going to be dropped in Linux kernel v6.14 [1], NetBSD and OpenBSD
> never had it, so there is no point in keeping the -taso option around.
>
> Also remove alpha special case that uses -taso from gdb.base/dump.exp
> in gdb testsuite.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/87jzb2tdb7.fsf_-_@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@unseen.parts>
> ---
>  gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp |  6 ------
>  ld/emultempl/alphaelf.em        | 31 -------------------------------
>  ld/po/bg.po                     |  7 -------
>  ld/po/es.po                     |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/fi.po                     | 12 ------------
>  ld/po/fr.po                     |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/ka.po                     |  7 -------
>  ld/po/ld.pot                    |  8 --------
>  ld/po/pt_BR.po                  |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/ro.po                     |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/ru.po                     |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/sr.po                     |  9 ---------
>  ld/po/sv.po                     | 12 ------------
>  ld/po/uk.po                     |  9 ---------
>  14 files changed, 146 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp
> index 58fedb1d36b..54efe51fbaa 100644
> --- a/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp
> +++ b/gdb/testsuite/gdb.base/dump.exp
> @@ -26,12 +26,6 @@ set endian "auto"
>  
>  set formats {binary ihex srec tekhex  verilog}
>  
> -if {[istarget "alpha*-*-*"]} {
> -    # SREC etc cannot handle 64-bit addresses.  Force the test
> -    # program into the low 31 bits of the address space.
> -    lappend options "ldflags=-Wl,-taso"
> -}

Is this part right? SREC is a debugging format, so if we're going to do
this, we'd need to drop the SREC format, or accept it's going to be
untested, I think?

Adding gdb-patches@.

> [...]

thanks,
sam