On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 16:57 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> For 2.18, it's revision 1.1.18.1 of elf.texi. I had to go into the
> Attic to find it. Cvsweb does not appear to do The Right Thing for
> files that do not exist on trunk.
Oh blerg. OK, thanks.
Still and all, it's something that wou
On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 11:59 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> The release branch has the generated files in it. This is how
> binutils releases have traditionally been managed. It's the snapshots
> before the final release that cause this problem.
Hi Daniel;
I don't think this is true, at least
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 06:51:22PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> Still and all, it's something that would be great to have fixed in the
> official release distributions; if for no other reason than it would
> save you guys a lot of bug reports about problems with makeinfo (in
> researching this bug I
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 02:19:36PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-06-21 at 11:59 -0400, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > The release branch has the generated files in it. This is how
> > binutils releases have traditionally been managed. It's the snapshots
> > before the final release that c
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:39:57PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> The first problem is that the bfd/elf.c file is much newer (like, 3
> weeks newer) than most of the rest of the bfd directory, and in
> particular much newer than the bfd/doc/elf.texi file. If the
> distribution was created as it should
There are some problems with the released tarball for binutils 2.18,
which make it impossible to build unless you have a proper version of
makeinfo installed on your system. I've seen the problems reported that
a specific version of makeinfo is required, but this bug is not about
that: a correctly
