On 20/06/2019 15:10, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> Please may I apply this patch to the gcc-9, gcc-8 and gcc-7 branches ?
>
> I have tested it on all three branches and found no problems.
>
> Cheers
> Nick
>
> 2019-06-07 Nick Clifton
>
> Import these changes from the bin
Hi Richard,
Please may I apply this patch to the gcc-9, gcc-8 and gcc-7 branches ?
I have tested it on all three branches and found no problems.
Cheers
Nick
2019-06-07 Nick Clifton
Import these changes from the binutils/gdb repository:
2019-05-28 Nick Alcock
On 18/06/2019 17:20, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
>>> OK, here is a resubmission of my patch with just the addition of the
>>> libctf patches this time.
>
> [Sorry - this one got put on a back burner].
>
>> Would it be feasible to backport this to the other maintained branches
>> so
Hi Richard,
>> OK, here is a resubmission of my patch with just the addition of the
>> libctf patches this time.
[Sorry - this one got put on a back burner].
> Would it be feasible to backport this to the other maintained branches
> so that the option of using them with current binutils wo
On 10/06/2019 10:47, Nick Clifton wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> OK, here is a resubmission of my patch with just the addition of the
> libctf patches this time. (Sorry about the previous bad patch).
> Tested with a bootstrap and a normal build. OK to apply ?
>
> Cheers
> Nick
Would it be fe
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 11:47 AM Nick Clifton wrote:
>
> Hi Richard,
>
> OK, here is a resubmission of my patch with just the addition of the
> libctf patches this time. (Sorry about the previous bad patch).
> Tested with a bootstrap and a normal build. OK to apply ?
Sure.
Thanks,
Richar
Hi Richard,
OK, here is a resubmission of my patch with just the addition of the
libctf patches this time. (Sorry about the previous bad patch).
Tested with a bootstrap and a normal build. OK to apply ?
Cheers
Nick
2019-06-07 Nick Clifton
Import these changes from the binut
Hi Richard,
>>> +target_modules = { module= libmpx;
>>> + bootstrap=true;
>>> + lib_path=.libs; };
>>
>> It seems to re-introduce things that have been removed on the
>> GCC side.
> Is it just that one hunk that's problematic (I can't see any other
> non-relevant
On 29/05/2019 14:46, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:40 PM Nick Clifton wrote:
>>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I would like to bring over a few additions that have recently been
>> made to the binutils versions of the Makefile.def and configure.ac
>> files. Any objections ?
>>
>> N
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:40 PM Nick Clifton wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> I would like to bring over a few additions that have recently been
> made to the binutils versions of the Makefile.def and configure.ac
> files. Any objections ?
>
> Note - I did run a toolchain bootstrap after applying
Hi Guys,
I would like to bring over a few additions that have recently been
made to the binutils versions of the Makefile.def and configure.ac
files. Any objections ?
Note - I did run a toolchain bootstrap after applying this patch
locally and that went OK...
Cheers
Nick
./ChangeLo
11 matches
Mail list logo
