This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org 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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: PATCH: binutils without a date is not handled properly without GNU sed


On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 08:43:33PM -0500, Loren James Rittle wrote:
> In article <20030515021737.N13397@devserv.devel.redhat.com>,
> Jakub Jelinek<jakub@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> >> $(ld_vers) is later parsed with expr in a manner that tolerates extra
> >> dotted numbers after the patch level. [] Permission to apply to mainline?
> 
> Thanks for the quick review Jakub and additional comments from Andreas.
> 
> > Certainly not, this breaks the test. [] There were binutils
> > 2.12.90.0.xx releases which did not have proper hidden support.
> 
> Ah, precisely why I posted it for comments instead of assuming my
> patch was somehow "obvious".  Sorry I didn't know about those
> releases.  I can see your point and since we are unwilling to discuss
> the merits or lack thereof of supporting test releases that were
> suppose to be killed upon the release of FSF 2.13 (I do assume that
> you and binutils developers know better than I on that point; I don't
> want to open that can ;-), I will produce another patch given below.

For whatever unfortunate reason, the 2.12.90.0.xx releases were not
test releases - anything with the fourth 0 and a fifth digit comes from
HJ's "Linux binutils" and is considered a release.

Just to clarify the record.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


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