This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Q: Estimated date for 2.16 release ?
- From: "Aaron W. LaFramboise" <aaron98wiridge9 at aaronwl dot com>
- To: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow at false dot org>
- Cc: Tomer Levi <Tomer dot Levi at nsc dot com>, nickc at redhat dot com, Paul Woegerer <Paul dot Woegerer at nsc dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, dannysmith at users dot sourceforge dot net
- Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 05:02:33 -0600
- Subject: Re: Q: Estimated date for 2.16 release ?
- References: <OF61577335.B313AA4D-ONC2256F96.004AE546-C2256F96.004B5A37@nsc.com> <20050127140010.GA447@nevyn.them.org>
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 03:40:59PM +0200, Tomer Levi wrote:
>>Is there any estimated date for the next Binutils formal release (version
>>2.16) ?
>>We would like to plan our work accordingly.
>
> There is no plan yet. I would like to branch sometime very soon; does
> anyone know of issues that need to be resolved before the next release?
For i386 PE targets, there is an issue with weak symbol support. Since
2.16 will be the first release where these "work," it would be nice if
their semantics were fixed for the foreseeable future.
Specifically, while the current PE weak symbol semantics are correct
with respect to applicable standards and documentation, they are
incompatible with ELF in one particular respect. The feedback I have
received indicates that this sort of compatibility may be important.
See <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10854052> for
details.
I'm waiting for feedback on the mingw-dvlpr list (or here). If it seems
the consensus is that this extension should be implemented, I'll submit
a patch. The latest I'd submit a patch would be on February 21.
Aaron W. LaFramboise