During the first binutils upgrade, which was approx. 2 weeks ago, I
saw some strange stuff happening. For example, make and zcat were
catching sig. 11 on a semi-regular basis. Anyone else see this? Of
course, the problem has long since been solved, but I guess there
really were problems that ar
On Thu, May 04, 2000 at 03:18:38PM -0400, Donn Miller wrote:
> I noticed that a newer version of binutils is in the source code tree
> (2.91). Is there anything that needs to be set during the make world
> to make 2.91 the default binutils?
Uh... that would be 2.9.1 which is the version that is
I noticed that a newer version of binutils is in the source code tree
(2.91). Is there anything that needs to be set during the make world
to make 2.91 the default binutils?
- Donn
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Just FYI; the appended message was posted to the EGCS developer's list
five days ago. Although H. J. Lu seems to be targeting only Linux, the
fact that he mentions testing under Solaris (both Sparc and x86) suggests
that he might be open to some input from us as well.
-Ed
Da
On Sat, 12 Feb 2000, Daniel Robbins wrote:
> URL above, and it seemed to work ok. You *can expect* problems and
> challenges integrating 2.95.2 into FreeBSD -- it's like a whole new
> compiler. And it *will* cause new compile errors that were not
> flagged before. That's just the nature of the
Hiya,
OK, I'll email him and ask him to post suggestions to this list, and
forward the message to me. However, I am a FreeBSD newbie, recently
arriving from the Linux camp, so any specific problems/questions that
need to be asked should be asked by whoever is having the problem,
( i.e. I am not
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
> Why don't we do it? Let's find out from the maintainer of binutils
> which version he recommends, and then integrate it into the next
> version of -current. We can find the bugs and fix them on our own.
> Personally, I'd like to find
Daniel Robbins wrote:
> I've made a transition to the most recent set of GNU development tools for
> my own (Linux) distro, and all I can say is that it may take a bit of fiddling to
> find the "best" binutils that will work with gcc 2.95.2. But, it's definitely
> worth the work, since gcc's new
Hi,
I would have to agree with David. The release version of binutils is
horrendously out of date. The most recent (non-release) version can be found
at ftp://ftp.varesearch.com/pub/support/hjl/binutils/binutils-2.9.5.0.24.tar.gz.
I've made a transition to the most recent set of GNU developme
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:00:07PM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> in this case it's not M13 but the latest CVS tree ... But i'll see if
> recompiling the beast for a few days on end eventually will get it back in
> shape again. if not ... i'll probably come back and complain ;-)
Don't complain to
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 09:30:19AM -0500, Stephane Potvin wrote:
> I've been using the latest binutils from cygnus for the last month without
...
> But as I take it (only my 0.02$) it won't happen until they release an
> official version and it doesn't seems to be anywhere soon.
It doesn't seem i
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
> One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
> from the GNU ftp site or mirrors,
If you did that you would find the the latest GNU release is 2.9.1.
Guess what -- Binutils is getting little maintaince. They are
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Donn Miller
> Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2000 3:36 AM
> To: Pascal Hofstee
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: newer binutils for CURRENT ?
>
>
> Pascal Hofstee
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 05:46:12AM -0800, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
> > FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
> > all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
> > 2.9.
> I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
> FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
> all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
> 2.9.1 assembler.
That's odd, I have M13 working just great here under -current
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 09:29:07AM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
> FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
> all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
> 2.9.1
Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
> >
> > One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
> > from the GNU ftp site or mirrors, compile, and install them in
> > /usr/local. Then, set /usr/local/bin as the first entry in your P
On Sat, Feb 12, 2000 at 03:36:12AM -0500, Donn Miller wrote:
>
> One possible thing to try would be to download the latest binutils
> from the GNU ftp site or mirrors, compile, and install them in
> /usr/local. Then, set /usr/local/bin as the first entry in your PATH
> environment variable to ov
Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> They all suggest updating my binutils to get this problem fixed.
> (the FreeBSD-3.2-RELEASE Tinderbox indeed works just fine as that does't
> have a 2.95.2 version of gcc).
>
> Can i hereby voice a request for an updated set of binutils ?
One possible thing to try would
Hi,
I have been having some problems gettign Mozilla to start up under
FreeBSD-4.0-CURRENT .. and the comments given in the Bugzilla forum
all seem to blaim my problems to having a gcc 2.9.5.2 compiler and an (old)
2.9.1 assembler.
(http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27064)
They all su
20 matches
Mail list logo
