Re: new binutils needed for arm in 3.12-rc1

Måns Rullgård
2013-09-25T15:52:50Z

Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> writes:

> On 09/24/2013 09:07:57 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> I'd strongly suggest you make your binutils compatible with newer
>> instruction syntax instead of making the kernel more complex.
>
> Meaning I play whack-a-mole as this becomes permission to depend on
> endless new gnuisms just because they're there and nobody else is
> regression testing against them, not because they actually add anything.

Since when is assembling the instructions correctly, as specified in the
arch ref, and not in some other random way a gnuism?

--
Måns Rullgård
mans@mansr.com