Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 15:55:24 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/contrib/binutils/opcodes - Imported sources Message-ID: <20050708225524.GA4409@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <20050707221551.GA2512@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <200507072209.j67M9t0j099537@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050707221551.GA2512@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 06:15:52PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 10:09:55PM +0000, David E. O'Brien wrote: > > obrien 2005-07-07 22:09:55 UTC > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > src/contrib/binutils/opcodes - Imported sources > > Update of /home/ncvs/src/contrib/binutils/opcodes > > In directory repoman.freebsd.org:/tmp/cvs-serv99521 > > > > Log Message: > > Fix bogus fmov* SPARC opcodes. > > (Note this makes the vendor branch not represent Binutils in the vendor's > > CVS repository at any point in time. Portmgr did not like the state of > > Binutils on UltraSparc that represented the point in time the vendor fixed > > this issue. I'd rather have fixed this on RELENG_6.) > > It's a bit disingenuous to say that I "did not like" the binutils > snapshot you gave me that produced non-executable binaries on sparc64, > but thanks for finally fixing this. *sigh* I wasn't taking any pot shots at you. What brief 2-3 words would have summed up the situation that the existing binutils of that time were better for you and that the updated vendor bits were worse for you? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050708225524.GA4409>