From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 04:12:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 04:12:43 -0400 Received: from rcum.uni-mb.si ([164.8.2.10]:61202 "EHLO rcum.uni-mb.si") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 18 May 2001 04:12:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 10:12:27 +0200 From: David Balazic Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.4-ac10 To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Message-id: <3B04D96B.FCDA69E9@uni-mb.si> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (WinNT; U) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: en Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote : > > > > gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.4.4-ac/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe > -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -march=i686 -malign-functions=4 -c -o apm.o apm.c > > {standard input}: Assembler messages: > > {standard input}:180: Warning: indirect lcall without `*' > > {standard input}:274: Warning: indirect lcall without `*' > > > > Does anyone know what's up with that? Kernel problem or binutils issue? > > binutils is issuing a correct warning but if we fix the warning old old binutils > will then refuse to assemble it right. What old old binutils ? Isn't there a clear requirement for a minimum binutils version in Documentation/Changes ( or maybe it is README ... ) ? -- David Balazic -------------- "Be excellent to each other." - Bill & Ted - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -