From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id f8EJetY03214
	for linux-mips-outgoing; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:40:55 -0700
Received: from cygnus.com (runyon.cygnus.com [205.180.230.5])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id f8EJere03211
	for <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>; Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:40:54 -0700
Received: from localhost.localdomain (taarna.cygnus.com [205.180.230.102])
	by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA16152;
	Fri, 14 Sep 2001 12:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: The Linux binutils vs. the FSF binutils on Linux/mips
From: Eric Christopher <echristo@redhat.com>
To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
Cc: binutils@sourceware.cygnus.com, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-Reply-To: <20010914123642.A18552@lucon.org>
References: <20010914123642.A18552@lucon.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Evolution/0.13 (Preview Release)
Date: 14 Sep 2001 12:40:01 -0700
Message-Id: <1000496403.29163.0.camel@ghostwheel.cygnus.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk


> It seems that those small differences between 2 assemblers make a big
> difference for the Linux/mips kernel. Does anyone know why?

Dunno, what's the change.

-eric

-- 
Look out behind you!