Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 24 May 2000 11:38:25 -0700
From:      "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au>
Cc:        cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1 Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc1obj Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_int Makefile
Message-ID:  <20000524113825.D11538@dragon.nuxi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20000524125226.7CF101CE1@overcee.netplex.com.au>; from peter@netplex.com.au on Wed, May 24, 2000 at 05:52:26AM -0700
References:  <peter@netplex.com.au> <20000524125226.7CF101CE1@overcee.netplex.com.au>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, May 24, 2000 at 05:52:26AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote:
> > > 	Did you return to previous version ?
> > Yes. I got told off for touching this so it got backed out.
> > David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> is the maintainer.

But I think it was bad to give our users whiplash once you did change the
files.
 
> I've done a bit of research and I've found out exactly what is going on and
> why the new binutils has changed the behavior of the gcc build.  The old
> binutils ld had a bug in it's symbol handling and the new ld behavior is
> correct and exactly as expected.

So we are almost to the point we need to be at.  It would be nice to know
with `ld' 2.9.1 which symbols were used and does that explain any of the
other toolchain bugs every one brings up.  

If you had made a full explanation of the problem I would not have gone
off on you.  But things with the tool chain cannot move forward with out
understanding the issues.  Since we are using Binutils version 2.10 which
has *tons* of changes from 2.9.1, yet most Binutils developers attention
is on 2.11 and I have seen several bugs fixed in 2.11 that have not be
MFC to the 2.10 (release should be any day now) I am a little leary of
2.10.  IMHO, the FreeBSD release pardygme is supier and GNU Binutils and
GCC .0 releases are known to have bugs and is usally replaced by a .1
release farily quickley.

We need to know if issues are in the Binutils code, our configuration, or
other FreeBSD code.  When I hit the IA-64 cross-compiling, having a lot
of unknowns could be fatal.

I now have an email from a main Binutils maintainer that explains the
change happened in late December in order to be compatible with the
Solaris linker.  (note this email came w/in 30 minutes of me asking a
question of him)

-- 
-- David  (obrien@FreeBSD.org)


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000524113825.D11538>