This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [skimo@kotnet.org] libc/2030: [50 character or so descriptive subject here (for reference)]
- To: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>
- Subject: Re: [skimo@kotnet.org] libc/2030: [50 character or so descriptive subject here (for reference)]
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Date: 20 Jan 2001 17:37:03 +0100
- Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <u83dee9xkk.fsf@gromit.rhein-neckar.de><jesnmeqjwi.fsf@hawking.suse.de>
Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:
> Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes:
>
> |> Hi,
> |>
> |> we received the following bug report about problems with binutils.
> |>
> |> Should we demand newer binutils? Is this really a bug - and how can
> |> we check for recent enough binutils?
> |>
> |> Will the following work for configure? And is a test for 2.10.1 or
> |> newer sufficient?
>
> That would be wrong for ia64, where the latest version is 2.9-ia64-000717.
So, what version works on ia64?
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.inka.de
http://www.suse.de/~aj