Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 21:44:24 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc: dmitry AT baikal DOT ru
Subject: Re: binutils is no longer experimental
Message-ID: <20010808214424.B11131@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, dmitry AT baikal DOT ru
References: <20010807163431 DOT A31008 AT redhat DOT com> <011f01c11fd7$a18a9c50$cd823bd5 AT dmitry> <20010808111705 DOT E4406 AT redhat DOT com> <006901c12070$e8e8ee50$d2823bd5 AT dmitry> <20010808204440 DOT A10671 AT redhat DOT com> <00ce01c12078$deb4f4d0$d2823bd5 AT dmitry> <20010808213003 DOT A10813 AT redhat DOT com> <013201c1207c$a01f8ba0$d2823bd5 AT dmitry>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <013201c1207c$a01f8ba0$d2823bd5@dmitry>; from dmitry@baikal.ru on Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 10:39:14AM +0800

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 10:39:14AM +0800, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
>"Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
>> >> >Thanks for your answer. Could you please answer one more: why binutils
>> >> >provided by Cygwin distribution is so different from the ordinal one?
>> >> >Is it planned to do a merge?
>> >> 
>> >> ???  It is not "so different".  There is one minor change (below) in ld.
>> >> 
>> >> Otherwise it is straight from binutils CVS.
>> >
>> >Well, this command line
>> >
>> >diff -ur binutils-20010802-1\binutils binutils-2.11.2\binutils >binutils.diff
>> >
>> >gives a 328292 bytes diff. It is without comparison of other subdirectories.
>> >
>> >Am I doing something wrong?
>> 
>> "CVS"
>
>Do you mean that binutils-20010802-1 and binutils-2.11.2 were made not from CVS?

I build the cygwin version of binutils from the latest cvs version of binutils.

If I didn't do this then I wouldn't get any of the auto-import work, which was kinda
the whole reason for the release.

If you are producing patches they should be against the latest cvs version as well.

>Btw the result of diffing binutils-20010425-2 and binutils-2.11.2 is much more
>different.

And this is surprising?  Binutils 2.11.2 was released on 2001-06-19.  I'll leave
it to your imagination as to when binutils-20010425 was released.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/