From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailserv2.iuinc.com (IDENT:qmailr@mailserv2.iuinc.com [206.245.164.55]) by puffin.external.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id EAA16394 for ; Thu, 18 May 2000 04:51:49 -0600 Message-ID: <20000518045138.C14031@puffin.external.hp.com> Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 04:51:38 -0600 From: Philipp Rumpf To: Alan Modra Cc: parisc-linux@thepuffingroup.com Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] New binutils available from cvs References: <20000518034536.A14031@puffin.external.hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Alan Modra on Thu, May 18, 2000 at 08:37:20PM +1000 List-ID: On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 08:37:20PM +1000, Alan Modra wrote: > On Thu, 18 May 2000, Philipp Rumpf wrote: > > > On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 12:41:13PM +1000, Alan Modra wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > I have just uploaded a new binutils to puffin.external.hp.com cvs. The > > > new binutils, which you can get with "cvs co binutils-2.10", is a merge of > > > > Any reason for renaming cvs modules all the time instead of staying with > > one name and perhaps not pissing off people with slow, expensive > > connections ? > > Mainly so people can still easily use the old binutils. .diff.gz came to > 1.8M anyway. I can put the diff somewhere you can get it, if you like. > > > > ***BIG WARNING** > > > This binutils goes back to using the standard hppa comment char and line > > > separator char. Existing puffin parisc code needs to be modified to suit, > > > > This > > a) makes certain glbic code harder to work (which already does work, at > > that) > > Can you explain this? > > > b) is inconsistent with every single other architecture that does run > > Linux > > c) is inconsistent with my tree, and basically forces me to distribute > > binutils and gcc patches in addition to the gcc one-liner I already > > have. > > > > All in all this strikes me as not too smart. > > Using `!' for comments > a) breaks fp condition codes. No, it doesn't. The condition code for fp "not equal" is "<>", not "!=". > b) is inconsistent with existing hp assembler. Your point ? We broke existing assembly language / used the smarter of two possibilities on almost all architectures. > All in all .... :-) All in all even _if_ you have a reason to change it back it could have used some discussion. So far you haven't. > Item a) is the killer. It might be possible to work around this problem > and make `!' start a comment only when the preceding non-whitespace > character is not a comma, but this sort of horrible hack hasn't much hope > of ever being accepted back into FSF binutils. Any idea which illegal drug the person who decided "!=" was the fp not equal condition code was on ;) ? > > BTW, did you fix gcc to work with -mdisable-fpregs and actually make the > > kernel use that in the CVS tree ? It caused a lot of oopses here before > > I worked around it (patch is at > > ftp://linux-parisc.sourceforge.net/pub/linux-parisc/) (why we got oopses > > and what is wrong should be quite obvious if you know RTL - I don't and > > it seems reasonably obvious to me, I just can't fix it). > > No, I haven't done anything with gcc Anyone else ? I think you (plural) should at least have a look causing random data corruption. > Linuxcare. Support for the Revolution. And it's just in historical spirit that those actually supporting the revolution lose their jobs ... (yes, I think the signature is quite inconsiderate.) Philipp Rumpf