Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/05/01/20:39:16
> No, the files on simtel clearly show older binutils with higher version
> numbers than the newer ones judging by the dates of the files. We went from
> a higher version number to a lower one when 2.10 was released, and it seems
> to make no sense.
We went from 2.9 to 2.10. Clearly, 10 is a higher number than 9.
If you check the FSF's ftp site you see:
4480163 Oct 1 1996 binutils-2.7.tar.gz
5133892 May 1 1997 binutils-2.8.tar.gz
5139402 May 29 1997 binutils-2.8.1.tar.gz
5687300 Apr 11 1998 binutils-2.9.tar.gz
5694541 May 1 1998 binutils-2.9.1.tar.gz
7210401 Jun 19 2000 binutils-2.10.tar.gz
7284401 Nov 7 16:01 binutils-2.10.1.tar.gz
9871888 Apr 7 12:51 binutils-2.11.tar.gz
If you check DJGPP's ftp site you see:
bnu27b.zip B 1,712,024 961031 GNU Binutils 2.7 for DJGPP V2
bnu27d.zip B 1,892,577 970503 GNU binutils 2.7 docs: texi/html/dvi/ps
bnu27s.zip B 2,961,105 961028 GNU binutils 2.7 sources
bnu2951a.zip B 393,471 000302 GNU Binutils 2.9.5.1 libraries (BFD, opcodes)
bnu2951b.zip B 2,567,839 000302 GNU Binutils 2.9.5.1 for DJGPP V2
bnu2951s.zip B 5,313,791 000304 GNU Binutils 2.9.5.1 sources
bnu2951x.zip B 3,165,061 000229 GNU Binutils 2.9.5.1 non-DJGPP sources
bnu210a.zip B 284,305 000706 GNU Binutils 2.10 libraries (BFD, opcodes)
bnu210b.zip B 2,797,660 000828 GNU Binutils 2.10 for DJGPP V2
bnu210d.zip B 1,646,585 001108 GNU Binutils 2.10 docs: html/dvi/ps
bnu210s.zip B 8,456,594 000828 GNU Binutils 2.10 sources
bnu211a.zip B 321,931 010422 GNU Binutils 2.11 libraries (BFD, opcodes)
bnu211b.zip B 2,688,047 010422 GNU Binutils 2.11 for DJGPP V2
bnu211s.zip B 8,919,131 010423 GNU Binutils 2.11 sources
bnu211t.zip B 2,360,691 010422 GNU Binutils 2.11 testsuite
FYI the 2.9.5.* series was a set of unofficial releases leading up to
the 2.10 release.
- Raw text -