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]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: binutils-2.16 news


On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 05:49:26AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-04-21 at 12:50 +0930, Alan Modra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 12:16:11PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 10:39 +0100, Nick Clifton wrote:
> > > > >>+    h8300-*-coff
> > > > >>+    h8300-*-rtems*
> > > > > 
> > > > > Does this mean you are going to remove the entire h8 series or why are
> > > > > you planning to remove these 2 targets?
> > > > 
> > > > No, the h8300-elf port is still going to be valid.  It is just that at 
> > > > the moment it looks like nobody wants to step up and champion the 
> > > > h8300-coff and h8300-rtems ports...
> > > OK, I understand, the reason is coff?
> > 
> > No, the reason is a non-BFD_ASSEMBLER gas port.  I want to rip out all
> > the old non-BFD_ASSEMBLER gas code, so unless the tc files are converted
> > over to BFD_ASSEMBLER they will no longer compile.
> Now, you've lost me.
> 
> AFAIU, this would affect h8300-*-elf, too, i.e. you'd be removing the
> h8300 port as a whole.

case ${fmt} in
  elf | ecoff | multi | som)
    bfd_gas=yes
    ;;
esac

No, all ELF targets are BFD_ASSEMBLER.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC


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