This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC Release Delay
- To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- Subject: Re: GCC Release Delay
- From: Andi Kleen <ak at suse dot de>
- Date: 17 Jun 2001 22:14:45 +0200
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <139380000.992799600@gandalf.codesourcery.com.suse.lists.egcs.suse.lists.egcs> <20010617104733.A21841@lucon.org.suse.lists.egcs.suse.lists.egcs> <oupn177q7u2.fsf@pigdrop.muc.suse.de.suse.lists.egcs> <20010617114443.C2269@lucon.org.suse.lists.egcs>
"H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 08:28:37PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> writes:
> >
> > > FYI, yesterday's gcc 3.0 branch from CVS doesn't work with binutils
> > > 2.11.90.0.15 under Linux. See
> > >
> > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2001-06/msg00927.html
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > 3.0 C++ also breaks with more binutils versions (e.g. the one shipped with
> > SuSE 6.4). See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/2001-05/msg00843.html
> >
>
> It may be a real binutils bug.
It is very likely a binutils bug, but it'll still hit many users.
The releases notes should probably specify a binutils release level that is
safe.
-Andi