This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
[firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(]
- From: Christian Jönsson <christian at j-son dot org>
- To: Binutils <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:19:34 +0200
- Subject: [email@example.com: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(]
Is someone here trying to look into what Dave is saying here?
----- Forwarded message from "David S. Miller" <firstname.lastname@example.org> -----
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 02:41:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: v8.S dwarf2 eh frame issues again :(
From: "David S. Miller" <email@example.com>
From: Christian Jönsson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 11:45:34 +0200
On Sun, Apr 21, 2002 at 02:32:01AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> Not at all, java bugs are not qualified as regressions that can hold
> up 3.1 being released.
OK, is this issue constrained to java or might it have broader impact?
The v8.S libffi issue is constrained to java.
The dwarf unwind info misoptimization in binutils can impact any
platform, but that is a binutils bug in eh_frame optimization and
should not hold up the 3.1 gcc release.
----- End forwarded message -----