From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
To: David Daney <ddaney@avtrex.com>
Cc: Dave Korn <dave.korn@artimi.com>,
"'Daniel Jacobowitz'" <drow@false.org>,
binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Patch] was: MIPS assembler no longer "combines symbols in different segments"...
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 20:41:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0502281840260.16004@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <422351E4.4070002@avtrex.com>
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, David Daney wrote:
> > It's not a breaking change -- the relocation has never been a part of the
> > Linux ABI. It has simply been abused. If you use an undocumented
> > feature, you shouldn't be surprised if that feature disappears one day,
> > sorry.
> >
>
> What do you consider a "breaking change"? I don't care if it is part of some
> official ABI document. It is part of a de facto ABI that is used by GCC-3.3.x
It's a bug in GCC 3.3. It has been fixed. If you require
bug-compatibility, you may maintain it yourself either by fixing GCC 3.3
or by using your workaround.
We don't expand the ABI every time a bug in a tool makes it go beyond
what's already defined.
> By removing this relocation, you cannot use binutils 2.16 with GCC-3.3.x. In
> a perfect world, Binutils 2.15 would have had a non-broken linker and we would
> keep using it. But we don't live in a perfect world.
In a perfect world GCC 3.3 wouldn't have had this bug. Is backporting
the fix from GCC 3.4 impossible?
> I don't see what is gained in making binutils 2.16 unsuable with GCC-3.3.x.
Forcing the right bug fix instead of attempted workarounds?
Maciej
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-28 19:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-26 19:36 David Daney
2005-02-26 20:19 ` David Daney
2005-02-27 0:09 ` cgd
2005-02-27 1:17 ` David Daney
2005-02-27 2:47 ` [Patch] was: " David Daney
[not found] ` <mailpost.1109387217.12843@news-sj1-1>
2005-02-28 9:07 ` cgd
2005-02-28 16:30 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2005-02-28 17:15 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2005-02-28 18:06 ` Dave Korn
2005-02-28 19:00 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2005-02-28 19:52 ` David Daney
2005-02-28 20:41 ` Maciej W. Rozycki [this message]
2005-02-28 20:53 ` David Daney
2005-02-28 22:03 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2005-02-28 22:29 ` David Daney
2005-02-28 23:00 ` Richard Sandiford
2005-02-28 19:57 ` Dave Korn
2005-02-28 18:36 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.61L.0502281840260.16004@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl \
--to=macro@linux-mips.org \
--cc=binutils@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=dave.korn@artimi.com \
--cc=ddaney@avtrex.com \
--cc=drow@false.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).