From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2016 16:43:40 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] binutils: add comment with bug report reference In-Reply-To: <20161030132511.GA23794@waldemar-brodkorb.de> References: <20161030132511.GA23794@waldemar-brodkorb.de> Message-ID: <20161030164340.6d8d079b@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sun, 30 Oct 2016 14:25:11 +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote: > Add requested bug report > > Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb > --- > package/binutils/Config.in.host | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/package/binutils/Config.in.host b/package/binutils/Config.in.host > index a7610b4..dce6996 100644 > --- a/package/binutils/Config.in.host > +++ b/package/binutils/Config.in.host > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ choice > config BR2_BINUTILS_VERSION_2_27_X > bool "binutils 2.27" > # supported but broken on Microblaze > + # see https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20748 > depends on !BR2_microblaze Your bug report is about binutils 2.27 generating broken binaries for microblaze/musl, but you disable binutils 2.27 completely for microblaze, and not just for musl. Why so? Thanks, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com