This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [davem@redhat.com: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(]
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Binutils <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:26:19 +0200
- Subject: Re: [davem@redhat.com: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(]
- References: <20020421111933.GA25494@j-son.org>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 01:19:34PM +0200, Christian Jönsson wrote:
> Is someone here trying to look into what Dave is saying here?
Yes, I will be on Monday, provided I can reproduce it.
> ----- Forwarded message from "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> -----
>
> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 02:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
> To: christian@j-son.org
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(
> From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
>
> From: Christian Jönsson <christian@j-son.org>
> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:45:34 +0200
>
> On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 02:32:01AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> > Not at all, java bugs are not qualified as regressions that can hold
> > up 3.1 being released.
>
> OK, is this issue constrained to java or might it have broader impact?
>
> The v8.S libffi issue is constrained to java.
>
> The dwarf unwind info misoptimization in binutils can impact any
> platform, but that is a binutils bug in eh_frame optimization and
> should not hold up the 3.1 gcc release.
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
Jakub