From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13642 invoked by alias); 27 Jan 2005 14:26:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13465 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2005 14:26:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.oarcorp.com) (216.107.91.226) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 27 Jan 2005 14:26:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 27171 invoked from network); 27 Jan 2005 14:24:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO OARcorp.com) (192.168.1.2) by 0 with SMTP; 27 Jan 2005 14:24:46 -0000 Message-ID: <41F8F9D3.3080502@OARcorp.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:26:00 -0000 From: "Joel Sherrill " Reply-To: joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com Organization: OAR Corporation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Jacobowitz CC: Tomer Levi , nickc@redhat.com, Paul Woegerer , binutils@sources.redhat.com, Eric Norum Subject: Re: Q: Estimated date for 2.16 release ? References: <20050127140010.GA447@nevyn.them.org> In-Reply-To: <20050127140010.GA447@nevyn.them.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-01/txt/msg00448.txt.bz2 Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:40:59PM +0200, Tomer Levi wrote: > >>Hi Nick, >> >>Is there any estimated date for the next Binutils formal release (version >>2.16) ? >>We would like to plan our work accordingly. > > > There is no plan yet. I would like to branch sometime very soon; does > anyone know of issues that need to be resolved before the next release? With gcc 4.x coming, we have noticed that the problem Ralf reported here happens on multiple targets. I don't know if it was ever addressed or not. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2004-03/msg00489.html Eric Norum (cc'ed) recently narrowed it down to this construct: ============================================================= A little poking around reveals that it's the lines like: _RamBase = DEFINED(_RamBase) ? _RamBase : 0x0; _RamSize = DEFINED(_RamSize) ? _RamSize : 0x7f0000; _HeapSize = DEFINED(_HeapSize) ? _HeapSize : 0; /* 0x20000;*/ _StackSize = DEFINED(_StackSize) ? _StackSize : 1M; /* 0x2000;*/ that are killing ld. ============================================================== Does this sound familiar? -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel@OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985