Re: Binutils

Re: Binutils

[Jeff Sturm]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Mathieu Chouinard wrote:
> Which version of binutils I can use with gcc 3.0?

That depends on your target.  See http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html
for any notes specific to your installation.

Binutils 2.11.1 will soon be released, and should work for most supported
targets.

Jeff

Re: Binutils

[Philip Blundell]

>Binutils 2.11.1 will soon be released, and should work for most supported
>targets.

Binutils 2.11.1 is yesterday's news.  2.11.2, which should be on the mirrors 
soon, is the one you want.

p.


-- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 (debian)

iD8DBQE7L86BVTLPJe9CT30RAttoAJoC0CDJ0NE0nNWkSN8YrAunK3xcugCglnZA
NLhMIFx81dLyTJxc72pNbLA=
=5Wd1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Binutils

[Jeff Sturm]

On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Philip Blundell wrote:
> >Binutils 2.11.1 will soon be released, and should work for most supported
> >targets.
> 
> Binutils 2.11.1 is yesterday's news.  2.11.2, which should be on the mirrors 
> soon, is the one you want.

Oops.  Sorry for the misinformation.  Looking on the mirrors, I see only
2.11 (and now 2.11.2), so I had assumed the next release would be 2.11.1.

Jeff

Re: Binutils

[Philip Blundell]

>Oops.  Sorry for the misinformation.  Looking on the mirrors, I see only
>2.11 (and now 2.11.2), so I had assumed the next release would be 2.11.1.

No need to apologize.  In fact there *was* a 2.11.1 release, briefly, but 
a mistake in the packaging caused several important files to be omitted from 
the distribution.

p.


-- 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 (debian)

iD8DBQE7MEQyVTLPJe9CT30RAq0jAJ9O9HW5saEMqrYbbm8/SiLg70ZMkACfUh8c
EBWHuXNuUpOKGTlTdZQ71TQ=
=VFUt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Binutils

[Benoît Sibaud]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 349 bytes --]

> Oops.  Sorry for the misinformation.  Looking on the mirrors, I see only
> 2.11 (and now 2.11.2), so I had assumed the next release would be 2.11.1.
> 
ftp://mirrors.rcn.net/pub/sourceware/binutils/releases/
(..., 2.11, 2.11.1, 2.11.2)

I needed to check several mirrors to find an uptodate one.

--
Benoît Sibaud
R&D Engineer - France Telecom

Re: Binutils

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jun 19, 2001, Jeff Sturm <jsturm@one-point.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Philip Blundell wrote:
>> >Binutils 2.11.1 will soon be released, and should work for most supported
>> >targets.
>> 
>> Binutils 2.11.1 is yesterday's news.  2.11.2, which should be on the mirrors 
>> soon, is the one you want.

> Oops.  Sorry for the misinformation.  Looking on the mirrors, I see only
> 2.11 (and now 2.11.2), so I had assumed the next release would be 2.11.1.

2.11.1 was recalled due to packaging problems.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist    *Please* write to mailing lists, not to me

Binutils

[Diego Morales]

	How/where can I get the binutils package for Gcc 3.2 for an Hp UX
11.11??????

DJMoralesM
     dmorales@districenter.es
     dmorales@condeminas.com
     Telf. 93 264 3940

Re: Binutils

[Ben Elliston]

>>>>> "Diego" == Diego Morales <dmorales@districenter.es> writes:

  Diego> How/where can I get the binutils package for Gcc 3.2 for an
  Diego> Hp UX 11.11??????

Your question would be better asked on the binutils mailing list:
binutils@sources.redhat.com.

Ben

binutils

[Earl Healey]

Hi,

I downloaded gcc. I understand it is freeware.  I am working with the
NIST CD.  I was told that I must download binutils for gcc to work.
However, when I went to download binutils, all i got was a file
listing.  Any ideas?

Thanks.

Earl

----------------------------------------------------
Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97

Re: binutils

[Craig Rodrigues]

On Sun, Jan 13, 2002 at 11:23:26PM -0800, Earl Healey wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I downloaded gcc. I understand it is freeware.  I am working with the
> NIST CD.  I was told that I must download binutils for gcc to work.
> However, when I went to download binutils, all i got was a file

Talk to whoever packaged the NIST CD to see what they mean.

Details about binutils is here:
http://www.gnu.org/software/binutils/binutils.html
-- 
Craig Rodrigues        
http://www.gis.net/~craigr    
rodrigc@mediaone.net          

Re: Binutils

[Paolo Carlini]

Hi,

My personal advice would be to wait a few hours and grab the latest
stable release, that is 2.11.1:

    http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2001-06/msg00395.html

However, depending on the details of your system (processor, OS) 2.11 or
even 2.10.1 could be ok too...

P.



Mathieu Chouinard wrote:

> Which version of binutils I can use with gcc 3.0?
> Mathieu

Binutils

[Mathieu Chouinard]

Which version of binutils I can use with gcc 3.0?
Mathieu

Binutils

[Bruce M Beach]

   Hello All

    I couldn't find a mailing list for binutils (2.9.1) so I thought
    that this list might be the closest thing to it. 
   
    I can build binutils without any problems but what I can't
    do is build them statically. I have tried
    env LDFLAGS=-static ./configure which sometimes works on other packages
    or exporting LDFLAGS=-static to the environment and even manually
    editing the Makefiles resulting from configure. Does anyone know
    how to get them to compile statically?
 
    Bruce

bmbeach@lynchburg.net

Re: Binutils

[Alex Buell]

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Bruce M Beach wrote:

>     I can build binutils without any problems but what I can't
>     do is build them statically. 

If you had read the notes that came with the distribution, you would have
found out ./configure --disable-shared --enable-static would have done the
trick.

Cheers, 
Alex 
-- 

Legalise cannabis today!

http://www.tahallah.demon.co.uk - updated!

Re: Binutils

[Alex Buell]

On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Bruce M Beach wrote:

>     I can build binutils without any problems but what I can't
>     do is build them statically. 

If you had read the notes that came with the distribution, you would have
found out ./configure --disable-shared --enable-static would have done the
trick.

Cheers, 
Alex 
-- 

Legalise cannabis today!

http://www.tahallah.demon.co.uk - updated!

Binutils

[Bruce M Beach]

   Hello All

    I couldn't find a mailing list for binutils (2.9.1) so I thought
    that this list might be the closest thing to it. 
   
    I can build binutils without any problems but what I can't
    do is build them statically. I have tried
    env LDFLAGS=-static ./configure which sometimes works on other packages
    or exporting LDFLAGS=-static to the environment and even manually
    editing the Makefiles resulting from configure. Does anyone know
    how to get them to compile statically?
 
    Bruce

bmbeach@lynchburg.net

Binutils

[John Karcz]

Please excuse me if the answer to this is obvious,
but I haven't been able to figure it out from info
pages, install files, etc.

From my limited abilty to read make/configure files,
it seems that it's possible to put a directory for
Binutils under the, say, egcs-1.0.1 source directory,
and have configure also configure ar, ld, etc, and use
them in building targets.  My question is this:  What
should the directory tree look like?  Should I just
put the binutils-2.8.1.0.19 under the root egcs directory,
and rename it binutils?  Or should I somehow redistribute 
the various files and directories from binutils-2.8.1.0.19/
into the egcs root directory?

I hope the question was clear... Thanks for the help!
John

Re: Binutils

[Jeffrey A Law]

  In message < 199802062325.SAA22279@localhost >you write:
  > >From my limited abilty to read make/configure files,
  > it seems that it's possible to put a directory for
  > Binutils under the, say, egcs-1.0.1 source directory,
  > and have configure also configure ar, ld, etc, and use
  > them in building targets.
Yes.


  > My question is this:  What
  > should the directory tree look like?  Should I just
  > put the binutils-2.8.1.0.19 under the root egcs directory,
  > and rename it binutils?  Or should I somehow redistribute 
  > the various files and directories from binutils-2.8.1.0.19/
  > into the egcs root directory?
Second option.

Basically, you'd want to take the "binutils", "bfd", "ld", "opcodes",
"gas", "gprof",  put them in your egcs source tree.  ie


egcs source tree
  gcc
  libio
  libstdc++
  gas
  binutils
  bfd
  ld
  opcodes
  gprof


Basically, anything you find in binutils that is not in egcs you can
put in the egcs toplevel directory.

Note this also applies to gdb and other utilities.

jeff