From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5147 invoked by alias); 3 Feb 2010 15:01:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 4988 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Feb 2010 15:01:09 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (HELO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com) (217.140.96.50) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:01:04 +0000 Received: from cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com (cam-owa2.emea.arm.com [10.1.105.18]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id o13F0eeI013970; Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:00:40 GMT Received: from [10.1.129.63] ([10.1.255.212]) by cam-owa2.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 3 Feb 2010 15:00:40 +0000 Subject: Re: binutils 2.20.1 From: Ramana Radhakrishnan Reply-To: ramana.radhakrishnan@arm.com To: Christophe LYON Cc: Tristan Gingold , binutils@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: <4B697879.9050807@st.com> References: <293186.66232.qm@web51508.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <4B697879.9050807@st.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:01:00 -0000 Message-Id: <1265209239.18279.15.camel@e200593-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes 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 X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg00046.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2010-02-03 at 14:22 +0100, Christophe LYON wrote: > On 03.02.2010 14:08, Tristan Gingold wrote: > > > > On Feb 3, 2010, at 8:15 AM, Kenny Simpson wrote: > > > >> When is 2.20.1 expected out? > > > > Soon. There is still one issue to be solved (ARM related). > > > > Are you talking about > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-01/msg00342.html ? > > If so, sorry for the delay I am still working on it, but during this > process I have discovered other issues. > > In short, I think that > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2009-03/msg00511.html Is there a testcase that shows a problem caused by this patch ? I'd be interested in hearing about it as the original author of that patch and helping in any way possible in fixing the breakage if any. cheers Ramana