[APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[Jonathan Larmour]

I just sent a fix for an obvious typo in various linker scripts to 
ecos-patches. A number of .ld files had .gnulinkonce.s instead of 
.gnu.linkonce.s.

http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-patches/2003-04/msg00057.html

It should be applied because a) it's obvious and b) without it people on 
quite a few targets may not have working new/delete. The risks are zero 
unless I had a finger fumble!

Please someone say yes so I don't have to hang around worrying about 
whether I'll forget to apply it! :-)

Jifl
-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine

Re: [APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[Gary Thomas]

On Wed, 2003-04-09 at 13:05, Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> I just sent a fix for an obvious typo in various linker scripts to 
> ecos-patches. A number of .ld files had .gnulinkonce.s instead of 
> .gnu.linkonce.s.
> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-patches/2003-04/msg00057.html
> 
> It should be applied because a) it's obvious and b) without it people on 
> quite a few targets may not have working new/delete. The risks are zero 
> unless I had a finger fumble!
> 
> Please someone say yes so I don't have to hang around worrying about 
> whether I'll forget to apply it! :-)

They seem reasonable enough to me - although I don't have any
machines to test on :-)

Go for it.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Thomas                 |
MLB Associates              |  Consulting for the
+1 (970) 229-1963           |    Embedded world
http://www.mlbassoc.com/    |
email: <gary@mlbassoc.com>  |
gpg: http://www.chez-thomas.org/gary/gpg_key.asc
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[Jonathan Larmour]

I won't apply the below patch in deference to Nick applying his linker 
scripts and mine together, which, since they touch the same files, is 
(presumably?) easier overall.

I know he hasn't submitted them for approval yet, but I know he's going to ;).

Jifl

Jonathan Larmour wrote:
> I just sent a fix for an obvious typo in various linker scripts to 
> ecos-patches. A number of .ld files had .gnulinkonce.s instead of 
> .gnu.linkonce.s.
> 
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-patches/2003-04/msg00057.html
> 
> It should be applied because a) it's obvious and b) without it people on 
> quite a few targets may not have working new/delete. The risks are zero 
> unless I had a finger fumble!
> 
> Please someone say yes so I don't have to hang around worrying about 
> whether I'll forget to apply it! :-)
> 
> Jifl


-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine

Re: [APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[Nick Garnett]

Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com> writes:

> I won't apply the below patch in deference to Nick applying his linker
> scripts and mine together, which, since they touch the same files, is
> (presumably?) easier overall.
> 
> I know he hasn't submitted them for approval yet, but I know he's going to ;).

I was actually waiting for you and Bart to submit your patches for
approval before submitting mine.


-- 
Nick Garnett                    eCos Kernel Architect
http://www.ecoscentric.com/     The eCos and RedBoot experts

Re: [APPROVE?] GNU linkonce patch

[Jonathan Larmour]

Nick Garnett wrote:
> Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>I won't apply the below patch in deference to Nick applying his linker
>>scripts and mine together, which, since they touch the same files, is
>>(presumably?) easier overall.
>>
>>I know he hasn't submitted them for approval yet, but I know he's going to ;).
> 
> 
> I was actually waiting for you and Bart to submit your patches for
> approval before submitting mine.

As above, I'll leave "mine" to you to avoid more hassle for you merging 
ChangeLogs again, but if you prefer me to do mine separately I can do that 
too. As for Bart's, if you mean the __cxx_pure_virtual thing, that's 
already been approved and checked in, so go for it :-).

cvs -q diff -D 2003-04-09 -D 2003-04-11 hal
does the diff, if you strip out the trivial change to 
hal/arm/xscale/ixp425/current/ChangeLog

Jifl
-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[  can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln   ]-- Opinions==mine