Re: RFC: x86: kill binutils 2.16.x?

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

On 03/02/2011 01:28 PM, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 2 March 2011 21:11, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>> On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 10:15:14 -0800
>>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> binutils 2.16 (and presumably its prereleases, binutils 2.15.9x) appears
>>>> to have more bugs than any other version of binutils released in modern
>>>> history, *before or after*.
>>>>
>>>> We chronically run into problems because that particular binutils
>>>> version breaks code that works fine elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to know who would suffer from formally discontinuing
>>>> support for that version.  I understand some version of SLES shipped it,
>>>> but I don't know for sure.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I gave up and became a customer of
>>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/index_old.shtml
>>
>> Vegard,
>>
>> The source directory in the above doesn't seem to match the binary
>> directories, and is stuck at binutils 2.16.1.  At the very best this is
>> iffy from a GPL perspective, and very confusing to users.
>>
>> This is obviously a highly useful project, can we straighten out the
>> source situation?
> 
> I only uploaded the binaries in
> 
>     http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/old/
> 
> which should match the sources in
> 
>     http://www.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/src/
> 
> The binaries outside old/ are not made by me, but Tony (added to Cc).
> 
> I assume you're talking about the binaries _outside_ bin/old/, but let
> me know if I'm mistaken :-)
> 

Sorry, you're right... I got confused because the index file is still
the old one...

	-hpa