This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static

To: John Reiser <jreiser at BitWagon dot com>
Subject: Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
From: Philip Blundell <philb at gnu dot org>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2001 21:34:28 +0100
Cc: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
References: <991410192.21718.ezmlm@sources.redhat.com> <3B17DE86.DBAB8D23@BitWagon.com> <20010601120832.A7786@lucon.org> <3B17F612.7DACA4C2@BitWagon.com>

>> Please also CC your binutils bug reports to binutils@sources.redhat.com.
>> There are no archives for bug-binutils.
>
>OK.  I note that Philip Blundell has provided a reference in this case.
>
>Should bfd/README be updated to add the second address for bug reporting?

No: bug-binutils is the right place to send reports about released versions.
I'll see if something can be done to create an archive of that list, or at
least link to the bug-gnu-utils archive from the binutils web page.

p.

PGP signature

References:
- bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: John Reiser
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: bfd.flags&DYNAMIC vs. bfd_link_info.static
  - From: John Reiser

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]