From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1160 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2008 20:42:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 931 invoked by uid 48); 21 Jan 2008 20:41:59 -0000 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:54:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20080121204159.930.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug bootstrap/32287] gas version style changed causes warnings with configure In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "drow at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-01/txt/msg02420.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #9 from drow at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-21 20:41 ------- Here's why I didn't remember the patch - I just checked it in, I didn't write it. 2007-08-23 Brian Sidebotham * configure.ac (leb128): Modify sed statement to work with any binutils version string. * configure: Regenerate That version definitely handles: as_ver='GNU assembler (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.18.20071027' It does not handle: as_ver='GNU assembler (Linux/GNU Binutils) 2.18.50.0.3.20071102' This version format is new and is not produced by the FSF binutils. I assume it's a result of HJ Lu's Linux binutils after a merge from FSF trunk. The ld_vers check up higher in the file was changed to handle the new version format on 2007-09-23. HJ, Richi, I can find a lot of confused versions of HJ's patch in that thread, which starts here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01170.html Nowhere can I find the actual approval. The only version which was approved was safe, but the patch as applied is unsafe. If you put a .* there, then it will match any "xx.yy" string anywhere in the version string, including after the binutils version! This does not mess up on --with-pkgversion on new versions of binutils but only because sed will use the shorter match, and the binutils version comes second. + -e 's,^.*[ ]\([0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*.*\)$,\1,p' \ -e 's,^.*[ ]\([0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*\)[ ].*$,\1,p' \ Note that second line will never match now. The ld and as tests should be made uniform again but I think that we should go back to this one: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01170.html -- drow at gcc dot gnu dot org changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hjl dot tools at gmail dot | |com, rguenther at suse dot | |de, bonzini at gnu dot org http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32287