This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [Proposed binutils PATCH] Re: Diagnosing an intricate C++ problem

On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 02:31:03AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 11:35:13AM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> > FWIW, as far as I know, binutils 2.10 is too old and so many bugs
> > have been fixed since then.
> (*sigh*)
> I really wonder how to get the FSF/GNU toolchain software development
> efforts to follow the FreeBSD and OpenBSD development method of actually
> merging fixes in the HEAD development branch back to the release branch
> -- GASP!  rather than letting the release branch stagnate to the point of
> totally uselessness.  [the GCC 2.95 branch is a fine example of this, and
> the binutils_2.10_release branch only has 40KB of diff from release to
> this moment (and this *includes* the diff header CVS puts for each diff].

Why not xxxBSD just spend some effort to make sure the main trunck is
working for you? You are asking the binutils developers to do the
work for YOU. xxxBSDs are not the only platforms binutils supports.
If you want binutils in sourceware to work as reliably under xxxBSD
as Linux, you have to do the work yourselves. 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]