Continuing this thread from March: Richard Sandiford writes: > "Maciej W. Rozycki" writes: >> As it has turned out in the course of sorting out some earlier concerns >> the microMIPS change needs a couple of updates. For your reference I'm >> sending the current version of the original patch as it had to be >> regenerated. On top of this I'm sending the following updates: > > Everything except binutils-gas-umips-swap.diff is OK (as one commit, > like you say), with the changes below. It seemed a shame to get to the point of an approved version and not actually commit it. I've now updated and regenerated the patch series, made the changes from this approval, and applied a few other things I noticed. I've attached the three patches separately. Tested on mips64-elf mips64el-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mips64-linux-gnu mips64octeon-linux-gnu mips64-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mipsel-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mipsisa32el-linux-gnu mipsisa64-elf mips-linux-gnu mips-unknown-kfreebsd-gnu mips-wrs-vxworks Applied to trunk along with: http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2010-12/msg00399.html http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2011-02/msg00318.html Maciej: I regenerated and updated each of your patches separately, so if you'd like a copy of those individual patches, I can send them privately. I went on to say: > If you don't agree with some of the requested changes, let me know. and I gather from an off-list discussion a couple of months ago that there were indeed some things that you didn't like. But I think it'd be easier to deal with them as follow-ups. Please feel free to send patches against trunk. Or, if you tell me what it is you disagree with, I can try to fix it myself. I'm sure there are things that we've both missed, but again, we can deal with them as follow-ups. Last, but not least, thanks for all your hard work on this series. Thanks especially for perservering in the face of all my annoying niggles. :-) Richard The regenerated version of your patch series (excluding umips-swap, as per above):