From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 60082 invoked by alias); 18 May 2016 09:55:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 60064 invoked by uid 89); 18 May 2016 09:55:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 18 May 2016 09:55:06 +0000 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6AF550F48; Wed, 18 May 2016 09:55:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.4.243] (vpn1-4-243.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.243]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u4I9t3m9004548 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 18 May 2016 05:55:04 -0400 Subject: Re: New ld failure with STB_GNU_UNIQUE patch To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" References: <8760ucpz4e.fsf@redhat.com> Cc: binutils@sourceware.org From: Nick Clifton Message-ID: <0afc7cfc-3bfb-2732-5fc1-1cfcbcb31acc@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 09:55:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-05/txt/msg00247.txt.bz2 Hi Maciej, > @@ -1719,6 +1719,7 @@ proc check_shared_lib_support { } { > && ![istarget dlx-*-*] > && ![istarget epiphany-*-*] > && ![istarget fr30-*-*] > + && ![istarget ft32-*-*] > && ![istarget frv-*-*] > && ![istarget h8300-*-*] > && ![istarget i860-*-*] > > My pedantic side says the new entry ought to come after `frv-*-*' > actually. True. Feel free to apply a patch to correct this. :-) Cheers Nick