[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: ARM undefined symbols. Again.

    On Fri, 25 Feb 2005, Russell King wrote:
    > We can't say "you must use the current CVS binutils to build the
    > kernel" because that's not a sane toolchain base to build products
    > on.

    Sure. But it's probably enough that just a couple of core developers would
    have a CVS version to make sure that when it occasionally happens, it gets
    noticed quickly enough.

    In other words, I don't think you can say "get the CVS version" to most
    users, but I do not see for example you you or some of the people around
    you don't have at least one setup set up with that fixed version.

    This has been going on for at least a year, probably longer. I could
    understand it if it was a "we found this old bug, and haven't had time to
    get around it", but what I don't understand is when there's been a tools
    bug that's been known about for a long time, and apparently nobody has
    ever even bothered to try the fixed versions.

    > And yes, the toolchain peoples point of view is "fix the kernel".

    For a known bug where just having _one_ active developer using a fixed
    tool would mean that this doesn't happen?

    That makes no sense. Or, more likely, it means that the toolchain people
    are incompetent bastards who don't care about bugs and have no pride at
    all in what they do.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.023 / U:11.672 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site