http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12478
Sergei Steshenko <sergstesh at yahoo dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID |
--- Comment #10 from Sergei Steshenko <sergstesh at yahoo dot com> 2011-02-13
22:50:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> ./configure --help=recursive lists all accepted options.
How about addressing my statement that normal programs check validity of their
options ?
How about rereading, say, 'gcc' documentation, for example, gcc-4.4.5, the
gcc.pdf, file, page 130:
"
-Xassembler option
Pass option as an option to the assembler. You can use this to supply
system-
specific assembler options which GCC does not know how to recognize.
".
I.e. in 'gcc' case it _clearly_ written ("You can use this to supply system-
specific assembler options which GCC does not know how to recognize")
that 'gcc' does _not_ check validity of options passed to another program
(assembler in this case).
How about being consistent ? I mean' 'gcc' is also supported by 'sourceware'.
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
bug-binutils mailing list
bug-binutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-binutils
