This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org 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: [RFA] Undefined behaviour in include/coff/ti.h macros [was Re: BFD built failures with GCC 4.5]

From: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
To: Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>
Cc: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>, Binutils Development <binutils at sourceware dot org>, svein at stardust dot dnsalias dot com, twall at alum dot mit dot edu
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:53:49 +0100
Subject: Re: [RFA] Undefined behaviour in include/coff/ti.h macros [was Re: BFD built failures with GCC 4.5]
References: <m3zl0v5pyn.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <4BD1C045.5020203@gmail.com> <4BD29974.2090507@gmail.com>

Hi Dave,

   I'm not sure what might make a better solution though.  Could we make the
different TI COFF formats use different bfd target vectors,

This would definitely get my vote.

without breaking backward compatibility,

There should not be any compatibility problems provided that the new behaviour matches the old behaviour for the TI c4x/c5x targets. That is the intention after all isn't it ? To support the COFF2 format without lying to the compiler.

Cheers
  Nick

References:
- BFD built failures with GCC 4.5
  - From: Tom Tromey
- Re: BFD built failures with GCC 4.5
  - From: Dave Korn
- [RFA] Undefined behaviour in include/coff/ti.h macros [was Re: BFD built failures with GCC 4.5]
  - From: Dave Korn

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