--
What|Removed |Added
CC||dannysmith at users dot
||sourceforge dot net
http://sourceware
Hi,
I had posted a problem related to binutils 2.16.92
Please refer to the following link for the posted problem,
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-binutils/2006-07/msg00041.html
After further investigation, I found that this problem also exists for
ARM and m32r targets also.
Kindly let me k
Hi Roman,
You read it correctly, the intention is to provide the opcodes
foo.b/foo.w/foo.l, so using "foo .l" would be even more confusing.
OK, so presumably a workaround is to provide individual macros with the
names "foo.b", "foo.w" and so on, rather than just one macro.
The point is tha
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2006-07-26 10:41
---
Subject: Re: macro name syntax changed
Hi Roman,
> You read it correctly, the intention is to provide the opcodes
> foo.b/foo.w/foo.l, so using "foo .l" would be even more confusing.
OK, so presumably a workaro
--- Additional Comments From nickc at redhat dot com 2006-07-26 10:42
---
Created an attachment (id=1185)
--> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=1185&action=view)
Add new GAS command line switch --no-dot-in-macro-names
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?i
--- Additional Comments From zippel at linux-m68k dot org 2006-07-26 11:21
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> OK, so presumably a workaround is to provide individual macros with the
> names "foo.b", "foo.w" and so on, rather than just one macro.
This is not possible, if it has to work wit
